Erez Zadok wrote:
For regular files it's a little different b/c the invariant for non-directories is that only one lower object is looked up at the time (so the "max" becomes a straight copy).
OK, so "lower" is non-null only once in the loop, and all is fine.
If one uses utimes(2) to change the inode time absolutely, we just take those times as is in ->setattr.
My concern is about someone using utimes() on a lower inode. I believe the following script demonstrates the problem: #/bin/sh D=/tmp mkdir $D/b0 $D/union mount -t unionfs -o dirs=$D/b0 none $D/union date > $D/b0/old sleep 1 touch $D/b0/data ls -als --full-time $D/b0/data $D/union/data cp -a $D/b0/old $D/b0/data ls -als --full-time $D/b0/data $D/union/data umount $D/union rm -r $D/b0 $D/union Result: 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2007-12-18 15:02:48.666545207 +0100 /tmp/b0/data 0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2007-12-18 15:02:48.666545207 +0100 /tmp/union/data 4 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29 2007-12-18 15:02:47.661546000 +0100 /tmp/b0/data 4 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29 2007-12-18 15:02:48.666545207 +0100 /tmp/union/data The timestamp in the fourth line is incorrect because unionfs_copy_attr_times() does not refresh timestamps which have decreased since the previous copy. Pascal _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list: http://unionfs.filesystems.org/ unionfs@mail.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
