Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fs: record I_DIRTY_TIME even if inode already has I_DIRTY_INODE

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 02:37:26PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst
> index 6cd6953e175b..5d72b6ba4e63 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst
> @@ -274,6 +274,8 @@ or bottom half).
>  	This is specifically for the inode itself being marked dirty,
>  	not its data.  If the update needs to be persisted by fdatasync(),
>  	then I_DIRTY_DATASYNC will be set in the flags argument.
> +	If the inode has dirty timestamp and lazytime is enabled
> +	I_DIRTY_TIME will be set in the flags.

The new sentence is not always true, since with this patch if
__mark_inode_dirty(I_DIRTY_INODE) is called twice on an inode that has
I_DIRTY_TIME, the second call will no longer include I_DIRTY_TIME -- even though
the inode still has dirty timestamps.  Please be super clear about what the
flags actually mean -- I'm still struggling to understand this patch...

- Eric



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux