linux-kernel - 回复: [PATCH 2/2] hfs: fix to update ctime after rename

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID:
 <SEZPR06MB5269E572825AE202D1E146A6E888A@SEZPR06MB5269.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 14:22:33 +0000
From: 李扬韬 <frank.li@...o.com>
To: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@....com>, "glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de"
	<glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>, "slava@...eyko.com" <slava@...eyko.com>
CC: "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject:
 回复:  [PATCH 2/2] hfs: fix to update ctime after rename

Hi Slava,

>    +ERROR: access time has changed for file1 after remount
>    +ERROR: access time has changed after modifying file1
>    +ERROR: access time has changed for file in read-only filesystem

>It looks like that it is not the whole fix of the issue for HFS case.

The test cases that failed after applying this patch are all related to the atime not being updated,
but hfs actually does not have atime. 

So the current fix is sufficient, should we modify the 003 test case?

   dirCrDat:      LongInt;    {date and time of creation}
   dirMdDat:      LongInt;    {date and time of last modification}
   dirBkDat:      LongInt;    {date and time of last backup}

   filCrDat:      LongInt;    {date and time of creation}
   filMdDat:      LongInt;    {date and time of last modification}
   filBkDat:      LongInt;    {date and time of last backup}

Thanks,
Yangtao