On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 06:30:33PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > Are you looking at adding specific superblock operation for updating > timestamps on an inode? Or something else? I talk to Josef Bacik about this and he was planning to add it for btrfs. If he doesn't do it I'll probably take care of it myself sooner or later. > As to fdatasync optimisations, we could just add a new (flags) field > to the inode log item (i.e. separate to the format flags) that is > set here if and only if the inode has not already had it's core > logged and is in the CIL. If subsequent transactions that log the > core clear that flag, then we have a flag that would only be set if > timestamps have been logged by themselves. That would give > xfs_file_fsync some method of determining whether fdatasync > should force the log or not.... That's what I'm looking into right now. It's not quite as easy as it sounds, e.g. because ilf_fields is part of the log format, so we first need to add a new flags field that's still around with the timestamp only flag after the inode has been logged and so on. But I'm making slow progress on it. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
