| To: | Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH-v4 1/7] vfs: split update_time() into update_time() and write_time() |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 27 Nov 2014 08:49:52 -0800 |
| Cc: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Filesystem Development List <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux btrfs Developers List <linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS Developers <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20141127153315.GC14091@xxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1416997437-26092-1-git-send-email-tytso@xxxxxxx> <1416997437-26092-2-git-send-email-tytso@xxxxxxx> <20141126192328.GA20436@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20141127144116.GA14091@xxxxxxxxx> <20141127153315.GC14091@xxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
I don't think this scheme works well. As mentioned earlier XFS doesn't even use vfs dirty tracking at the moment, so introducing this in a hidden way sounds like a bad idea. Probably the same for btrfs. I'd rather keep update_time as-is for now, don't add ->write_time and let btrfs and XFS figure out how to implement the semantics on their own. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH-v4 6/7] ext4: add support for a lazytime mount option, Jan Kara |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH-v4 6/7] ext4: add support for a lazytime mount option, Theodore Ts'o |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH-v4 1/7] vfs: split update_time() into update_time() and write_time(), Theodore Ts'o |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH-v4 1/7] vfs: split update_time() into update_time() and write_time(), Theodore Ts'o |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |