Re: [PATCH 0/6] first step toward the new truncate sequence

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

 



On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:15:51PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Not sure. Some callers appear not to set ATTR_CTIME/ATTR_MTIME when
> making ATTR_SIZE changes. And I don't know the history of the required
> sync semantics here either.

It signals the difference between truncate and ftruncate.  See the
comment in xfs_setattr:

	/*
	 * Only change the c/mtime if we are changing the size
	 * or we are explicitly asked to change it. This handles
	 * the semantic difference between truncate() and ftruncate()
	 * as implemented in the VFS.
	 *
	 * The regular truncate() case without ATTR_CTIME and ATTR_MTIME
	 * is a special case where we need to update the times despite
	 * not having these flags set.  For all other operations the
	 * VFS set these flags explicitly if it wants a timestamp
	 * update.
	 */
--
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


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