Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > The do_wp_page() function is called in mm/memory.c after locking PTE. > > And the file_update_time() routine calls the filesystem operation that can > > sleep. It's not accepted, I guess. > > do_wp_page() is called with the pte lock but drops it, s

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
> The do_wp_page() function is called in mm/memory.c after locking PTE. > And the file_update_time() routine calls the filesystem operation that can > sleep. It's not accepted, I guess. do_wp_page() is called with the pte lock but drops it, so that's fine. Miklos -- To unsubscribe from this list:

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I'm not sure this auto-updating is really needed (POSIX doesn't > > > mandate it). > > > > Peter Shtaubach, author of the first solution for this bug, > > and Jacob Ostergaard, the reporter of this bug, insist the "auto-update" > > feature to be

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
> > I'm not sure this auto-updating is really needed (POSIX doesn't > > mandate it). > > Peter Shtaubach, author of the first solution for this bug, > and Jacob Ostergaard, the reporter of this bug, insist the "auto-update" > feature to be implemented. Can they state their reasons for the insiste

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > 2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > > > > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my > > > > > patch. > > > > > Specifically, the time sta

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
2008/1/17, Rogier Wolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 04:16:47PM +0300, Anton Salikhmetov wrote: > > 2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > > > > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous v

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
> 2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my > > > > patch. > > > > Specifically, the time stamps were set to the current time of the moment > > > > when

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Rogier Wolff
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 04:16:47PM +0300, Anton Salikhmetov wrote: > 2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my > > > > patch. > > > > Specifically, the

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my > > > patch. > > > Specifically, the time stamps were set to the current time of the moment > > > when syncing but n

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Rogier Wolff
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 01:45:43PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my > > > patch. > > > Specifically, the time stamps were set to the current time of the moment > > > w

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
> > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed > > > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my patch. > > Specifically, the time stamps were set to the current time of the moment > > when syncing but not the write reference was being done. This led to the > > follo

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2645 > > > > Changes for updating the ctime and mtime fields for memory-mapped files: > > > > 1) a new flag triggering update of the inode data; > > 2) a new field in the address_space structure for saving

Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2645 > > Changes for updating the ctime and mtime fields for memory-mapped files: > > 1) a new flag triggering update of the inode data; > 2) a new field in the address_space structure for saving modification time; > 3) a new helper function to update

[PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008-01-16 Thread Anton Salikhmetov
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2645 Changes for updating the ctime and mtime fields for memory-mapped files: 1) a new flag triggering update of the inode data; 2) a new field in the address_space structure for saving modification time; 3) a new helper function to update ctime and mtim