On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 05:22:32PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > The point is that the behaviour before the relatime patch was that > the kernel updated the atime to the current time as the kernel > knows about it, it didn't make any decision about "the past" or > "the future". > > Relatime is about reducing the frequency of atime updates, not > about deciding that one timestamp is more correct than another. That makes sense. Indeed, that's what the commit message should say rather than drawing arbitrary lines in the sand about what is a valid atime without further justification. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@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
