[linux-cifs-client] Re: set last write time = fsync ?

[Steve French]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:16:41 -0500
>
> "Steve French" <smfrench at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I don't worry about flushing atime (anyone crazy enough to do that
>  > would pay a huge performance penalty).
>  > Access is usually checked on open right ... so once a file is open
>  > even if the file becomes read-only, the writes, even cached writes
>  > continue.
>  >
>
>  Ahh, you're correct. I've been doing a lot of NFS work lately and was
>  thinking stateless... :-)
>
>  That patch should be OK then, though I think if someone is purposefully
>  setting the atime we should take care not to clobber it. We're not
>  going to be going through this codepath on every atime update, are we?
>  Just on utimes() type calls, correct? If so, doing a flush on atime
>  updates might be reasonable as well...
>
> Jeff Layton <jlayton at redhat.com>
>

I don't think we need to flush before setting (just) atime.
If the problem with timestamps is delayed writes getting written out
on close ... won't close update the atime anyway?


-- 
Thanks,

Steve