Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:50:54PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 06:40:29PM +0200, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>> Thanks for the analysis. Unfortunately I don't nearly know enough to
>>> work on this issue, but would like to track it as it affects our
>>> backup system. So, shouldn't #2645 be reopened again?
>> Yes, definitively as the current "fix" is incorrected. I'll try to cook
>> up a correct version once I get some time.
> Doing this correctly in the framework of the current codee is
> unfortunately not so easy, as calling ->setattr requires taking i_mutex
> which we can't in the pagefaul path.
> To fix this properly we need to actually update the timestamps during
> msync and co as done by the patches from Miklos:
> and Peter:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2645#c53 shows that Anton
doesn't quite agree with you on this. I really can't tell, would you
(or anybody from the accused XFS community) please comment? Or did
you perhaps fix it meanwhile? I can't easily test never kernels, but
I will if there's some chance.