On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 11:29:53PM +1100, Peter Moulder wrote: > What was the fate of Ingo's previous patch[*1] to implement this (which, > incidentally, also included updates to documentation and made the interval > configurable as Éric Piel suggests) ? Nobody merged it and Ingo got bored of pushing it. I sent it earlier, but nobody came up with an especially good argument for the configurability and everyone seemed to want to paint the patch pink with yellow polka dots, so I gave up and just sent a minimal one in the hope that nobody could find anything to complain about. > Just a minor nit, but the patch description (not included in the patch itself) > "at least once a day" isn't particularly accurate given that the patch enforces > at least a day [minus a second or so] has elapsed since the last update. The > description in the above-referenced patch "only once a day" better captures the > situation, I think. If mtime is changed then atime will be updated on the next access, so you can easily have more than one atime update a day. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
