Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > 1)If we consider the code for FAT and MSDOS to be same with respect to > timing updates - there there is difference in code as mentioned below: > a) For:vfat_rmdir() > inode->i_mtime = inode->i_atime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC; > For:msdos_rmdir() > inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC; > > b) For: vfat_unlink() > inode->i_mtime = inode->i_atime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC; > For: msdos_unlink() > inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME_SEC; > > So, atleast the uniformity in the code is missing for MSDOS and VFAT. MSDOS doesn't have atime. > 2) Regarding timings information > Original timings on VFAT: > #> mkdir parent > #> stat parent > File type: directory > I-node number: 30 > Mode: 40755 (octal) > Link count: 2 > Ownership: UID=0 GID=0 > Preferred I/O block size: 4096 bytes > File size: 4096 bytes > Blocks allocated: 8 > Last status change: Thu Jan 1 00:01:29 2012 > Last file access: Thu Jan 1 00:01:29 2012 > Last file modification: Thu Jan 1 00:01:29 2012 [...] > As can be seen from the 'stat' information - the timing information > appears same for VFAT like EXT4/XFS after changes. > Please let me know your opinion. You have to think about compatibility with other FAT, not unix fs. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- 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
