Re: [PATCH 05/32] Unionfs: do not use fsstack_copy_attr_all

On Sep 2 2007 22:20, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
>+/* copy a/m/ctime from the lower branch with the newest times */
>+static inline void unionfs_copy_attr_times(struct inode *upper)
>+{
>
>+		/* XXX: should we notify_change on our upper inode? */

I do not think so. Inotifying should only happen when the user really 
did something (e.g. touch, cp, whatever). When merely the newest time is 
picked from a stack of files and applied to the user-visible dentry, 
nothing should happen.


	Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [GIT PULL -mm] Unionfs/fsstack/eCryptfs updates/cleanups/fixes
    • From: "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" <[email protected]>
  • [PATCH 05/32] Unionfs: do not use fsstack_copy_attr_all
    • From: "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 03/32] VFS/fsstack: cpp endif comments
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 08/32] Unionfs: cache-coherency - update inode times
• Previous by thread: [PATCH 05/32] Unionfs: do not use fsstack_copy_attr_all
• Next by thread: [PATCH 30/32] Unionfs: update unionfs version number
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]