On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 07:49:13PM +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote: > After sending the first version of the patch, I realized that it > was flawed, because of some formatting by the MUA. It took me > some time to set up an MTA so that git send-email works. Now the > patch should apply cleanly. Please remove the present paragraph by using > git am -c. Apologies for the inconvenience(s). > -- >8 -- > Commit b3df561fbf has introduced the ability to convert extended > inode time precision on ext4, but this breaks builds on older distros, > where ext4 does not have the nsec time precision. > > Commit c615287cc tried to fix that by testing the availability of > the EXT4_EPOCH_MASK macro, but the test is not complete. > > This patch aims at fixing the macro test, and changes the > name of the associated HAVE_ macro, since the logic is reverted. > > This fixes #353 when ext4 has nsec time precision. Note that > the test fails when ext4 does not have the nsec time precision. > Maybe the test shouldn't be run in that case?
Good point. What's the way to find that out? We can create a sample ext4 filesystem and do a runtime check or parse it out of debugfs dump looking for the features. I think it's the 'extra_isize', that's what manual page ext4 says and that the patch adding 64bit timestamp support checks when reading the extended timestamps.
