On Tue, 2023-04-11 at 17:15 +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 07:54:46AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 10:37:02AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > When the mtime or ctime is being queried via getattr, ensure that we > > > mark the inode for a high-res timestamp update on the next pass. Also, > > > switch to current_cmtime for other c/mtime updates. > > > > > > With this change, we're better off having the NFS server just ignore > > > the i_version field and have it use the ctime instead, so clear the > > > STATX_CHANGE_COOKIE flag in the result mask in ->getattr. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_inode.c | 2 +- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_acl.c | 2 +- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 2 +- > > > fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- > > > 4 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_inode.c b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_inode.c > > > index 8b5547073379..9ad7c229c617 100644 > > > --- a/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_trans_inode.c > > > @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ xfs_trans_ichgtime( > > > ASSERT(tp); > > > ASSERT(xfs_isilocked(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL)); > > > > > > - tv = current_time(inode); > > > + tv = current_cmtime(inode); > > > > > > if (flags & XFS_ICHGTIME_MOD) > > > inode->i_mtime = tv; > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_acl.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_acl.c > > > index 791db7d9c849..461adc58cf8c 100644 > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_acl.c > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_acl.c > > > @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ xfs_acl_set_mode( > > > xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL); > > > xfs_trans_ijoin(tp, ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL); > > > inode->i_mode = mode; > > > - inode->i_ctime = current_time(inode); > > > + inode->i_ctime = current_cmtime(inode); > > > > Hmm, now we're adding a spinlock to all these updates. > > Does lockdep have anything exciting to say about this? > > > > (I don't think it will, just wondering aloud...) > > > > > xfs_trans_log_inode(tp, ip, XFS_ILOG_CORE); > > > > > > if (xfs_has_wsync(mp)) > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > index 5808abab786c..80f9d731e261 100644 > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c > > > @@ -843,7 +843,7 @@ xfs_init_new_inode( > > > ip->i_df.if_nextents = 0; > > > ASSERT(ip->i_nblocks == 0); > > > > > > - tv = current_time(inode); > > > + tv = current_cmtime(inode); > > > inode->i_mtime = tv; > > > inode->i_atime = tv; > > > inode->i_ctime = tv; > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c > > > index 24718adb3c16..a0b07f90e16c 100644 > > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c > > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c > > > @@ -565,6 +565,15 @@ xfs_vn_getattr( > > > if (xfs_is_shutdown(mp)) > > > return -EIO; > > > > > > + /* > > > + * XFS uses the i_version infrastructure to track any change to > > > + * the inode, including atime updates. This means that the i_version > > > + * returned by getattr doesn't conform to what the callers expect. > > > + * Clear it here so that nfsd will fake up a change cookie from the > > > + * ctime instead. > > > + */ > > > + stat->result_mask &= ~STATX_CHANGE_COOKIE; > > > + > > > stat->size = XFS_ISIZE(ip); > > > stat->dev = inode->i_sb->s_dev; > > > stat->mode = inode->i_mode; > > > @@ -573,8 +582,8 @@ xfs_vn_getattr( > > > stat->gid = vfsgid_into_kgid(vfsgid); > > > stat->ino = ip->i_ino; > > > stat->atime = inode->i_atime; > > > - stat->mtime = inode->i_mtime; > > > - stat->ctime = inode->i_ctime; > > > + if (request_mask & (STATX_CTIME|STATX_MTIME)) > > > + fill_cmtime_and_mark(inode, stat); > > > > Should we be setting STATX_[CM]TIME in the result_mask, just in case the > > caller asked for ctime and not mtime? > > I think the expectation is that everything in STATX_BASIC_MASK is always > returned to allow equivalence between stat() and statx(). So requesting > STATX_CTIME separately from STATX_MTIME isn't implemented widely, maybe > even not at atll?, yet. Right. Probably we ought to be more selective with how the result_mask gets set in vfs_getattr_nosec. Applications that use statx() effectively are still pretty rare, so most calls will fetch both times anyway. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
