linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, resend] relatime: Let relatime update atime at least once per day

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]

Message-ID: <4957CDD2.9040903@tudelft.nl>
Date:	Sun, 28 Dec 2008 20:04:50 +0100
From:	Éric Piel <E.A.B.Piel@...elft.nl>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, resend] relatime: Let relatime update atime at least
 once per day

Matthew Garrett schreef:
> Ensure relatime updates atime at least once per day
>     
> Allow atime to be updated once per day even with relatime. This lets
> utilities like tmpreaper (which delete files based on last access time)
> continue working.
:
Sorry, but I doubt it's a good idea. First, it breaks the simple
semantic of relatime (mtime > atime?), mixing it with a rather arbitrary
constant. Second, and most important, there are lots of workloads which
will be strongly affected by this modification. For instance, running
md5sum daily on the filesystem will cause a write for every file.

I think that to solve the problem for your use case, it's better to use
a different approach such as mounting separately /tmp (with the atime
option).

Eric

View attachment "E_A_B_Piel.vcf" of type "text/x-vcard" (368 bytes)