Relatime should update the inode atime if it is more than a day in the future. The original problem seen was a tarball that had a bad atime, but could also happen if someone fat-fingers a "touch". The future atime will never be fixed. Before the relatime patch, the future atime would be updated back to the current time on the next access. Only update the atime if it is more than one day in the future. That avoids thrashing the atime if the clocks on clients of a network fs are only slightly out of sync, but still allows fixing bogus atimes. Signed-off-by: yangsheng <sickamd@xxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: adilger@xxxxxxxxx --- fs/inode.c | 10 +++++++++- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c index 14084b7..5c4379a 100644 --- a/fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/inode.c @@ -1465,6 +1465,7 @@ sector_t bmap(struct inode *inode, sector_t block) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(bmap); +#define RELATIME_MARGIN (24*60*60) /* * With relative atime, only update atime if the previous atime is * earlier than either the ctime or mtime or if at least a day has @@ -1488,10 +1489,17 @@ static int relatime_need_update(struct vfsmount *mnt, struct inode *inode, return 1; /* + * Is the previous atime value in future? If yes, + * update atime: + */ + if ((long)(now.tv_sec - inode->i_atime.tv_sec) < -RELATIME_MARGIN) + return 1; + + /* * Is the previous atime value older than a day? If yes, * update atime: */ - if ((long)(now.tv_sec - inode->i_atime.tv_sec) >= 24*60*60) + if ((long)(now.tv_sec - inode->i_atime.tv_sec) >= RELATIME_MARGIN) return 1; /* * Good, we can skip the atime update: -- 1.7.11.7 -- 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
