linux-kernel - Re: Relative atime (was Re: What's in ocfs2.git)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 5 Dec 2006 22:11:45 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com>
Cc:	Valerie Henson <val_henson@...ux.intel.com>,
	Steven Whitehouse <steve@...gwyn.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Relative atime (was Re: What's in ocfs2.git)

On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 14:20:27 -0800
Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com> wrote:

> Update ocfs2_should_update_atime() to understand the MNT_RELATIME flag and
> to test against mtime / ctime accordingly.
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/file.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/file.c
> @@ -154,6 +154,15 @@ int ocfs2_should_update_atime(struct ino
>  		return 0;
>  
>  	now = CURRENT_TIME;
> +
> +	if (vfsmnt->mnt_flags & MNT_RELATIME) {
> +		if ((timespec_compare(&inode->i_atime, &inode->i_mtime) < 0) ||
> +		    (timespec_compare(&inode->i_atime, &inode->i_ctime) < 0))
> +			return 1;
> +
> +		return 0;

So if atime == mtime == ctime, we don't update the atime.

I think we should.  It seems risky to leave them all equal.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/