On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 04:42:45PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Out of curiosity, why does btrfs_update_time() need to call > btrfs_root_readonly()? Why can't it just depend on the > __mnt_want_write() call in touch_atime()? mnt_want_write looks only at the mountpoint flags, the readonly subvolume status is external to that. > Surely if there are times when it's not OK to write into a btrfs file > system and mnt_is_readonly() returns false, the VFS is going to get > very confused abyway. > > If the btrfs_update_time() is not necessary, then we could drop > btrfs_update_time() and update_time() from the inode operations > entirely, and depend on the VFS-level code in update_time(). It is necessary and the whole .update_time callback was added intentionally, see commits c3b2da314834499f34cba94f7053e55f6d6f92d8 fs: introduce inode operation ->update_time e41f941a23115e84a8550b3d901a13a14b2edc2f Btrfs: move over to use ->update_time 2bc5565286121d2a77ccd728eb3484dff2035b58 Btrfs: don't update atime on RO subvolumes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
