linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/14] fs: remove inode_update

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: <20251119062501.GA20592@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 07:25:01 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Mike Marshall <hubcap@...ibond.com>,
	Martin Brandenburg <martin@...ibond.com>,
	Carlos Maiolino <cem@...nel.org>, Stefan Roesch <shr@...com>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"gfs2@...ts.linux.dev" <gfs2@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"io-uring@...r.kernel.org" <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...ts.orangefs.org" <devel@...ts.orangefs.org>,
	"linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] fs: remove inode_update_time

On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 06:59:25AM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> > -	ret = inode_update_time(inode, sync_mode);
> > +	if (inode->i_op->update_time)
> > +		ret = inode->i_op->update_time(inode, sync_mode);
> > +	else
> > +		generic_update_time(inode, sync_mode);
> >   	mnt_put_write_access_file(file);
> >   	return ret;
> >   }
> 
> do you need to catch the value from generic_update_time() to match
> if case ? although original code was returning 0 for generic_update_time()
> case :

Yes.  It doesn't matter for this series, but it's good future-proofing.