From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14EDB1E3DE8; Fri, 30 May 2025 05:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748582504; cv=none; b=IcrDvmZc3hxhsF9g5H3DntqpClb2FQLPyHjDLvB5Cw0BdpxrHk2qMGfirMLPiMFnCXHyvirygGAXadOnceL0n38L9/qOZlqvj0t4KJpeTTvMwrcrPjzkGq3016wKFWEpagMvOkgnWoOnuOWfJwFCGrZ/W4NQdMh/gWcuk1PLqL4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1748582504; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6GtyjWgTMcrJWZp97aOKpurW7V3N2yGrsSmdcIKOhK0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZJXUitLTm6e9OYz/4qdO8M3za/T6R51t2kK/jrPOljuo7jw1u3a+sruLiBx3aE81kWyZaGJ68CfISq/dzUpbXOoy8WPeQ26SP+bG9lzlWllUZPfvNikGQgZagSrBxhVt3ERUyT3CQZYUrTs2G4M87dQ2BxLkOKtmWnikZ35GUp8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XQSop8Gq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XQSop8Gq" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7596BC4CEED; Fri, 30 May 2025 05:21:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1748582503; bh=6GtyjWgTMcrJWZp97aOKpurW7V3N2yGrsSmdcIKOhK0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XQSop8GqsDAL4hWo/RY513CbLEFaNs486dz5ZrmHE2E++y0eYEknXCzduVAGt1/Gq gqCs4qtwUQ8T4IKvRhWEcaF2ICBGDpRY0O+LAAJYEDWLHRIO3WFQwXUn7+B9xpSISd Xg8o2vL2eQ3M9+xOhpWD2NbfICUBoN46BNjF7tSGKxaHQeJggG1XUV2hAeXdbSvDPw ne7fa4pNOsXtmm8Hf6qCjja981SO8tt3Py8N7D4PqPUNzuGz/Y0HaI0kV2rnCJ7p9K P2WLq7BRBdLuSppqSW62UXzEE1qM/OnfwVymmqqMaY9N+BVCpCBnrVVUBsj9Ba758h g24sz6aTeqdJg== Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 07:21:40 +0200 From: Christian Brauner To: Yangtao Li Cc: Viacheslav Dubeyko , "glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de" , "slava@dubeyko.com" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] hfs: correct superblock flags Message-ID: <20250530-gutmachen-pudding-d69332f92e08@brauner> References: <20250519165214.1181931-1-frank.li@vivo.com> <20250519165214.1181931-2-frank.li@vivo.com> <7deb63a4-1f5f-4d6c-9ff4-0239464bd691@vivo.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <7deb63a4-1f5f-4d6c-9ff4-0239464bd691@vivo.com> On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 10:25:02AM +0800, Yangtao Li wrote: > +cc Christian Brauner > > 在 2025/5/29 05:26, Viacheslav Dubeyko 写道: > > On Wed, 2025-05-28 at 16:37 +0000, 李扬韬 wrote: > > > Hi Slava, > > > > > > > I am slightly confused by comment. Does it mean that the fix introduces more errors? It looks like we need to have more clear explanation of the fix here. > > > > > > I'll update commit msg. > > > > > > > s->s_flags |= SB_NODIRATIME | SB_NOATIME; > > > > > > IIUC, SB_NOATIME > SB_NODIRATIME. > > > > > > > Semantically, it's two different flags. One is responsible for files and another > > one is responsible for folders. So, this is why I believe it's more safe to have > > these both flags. > > To be honest, from my point of view, SB_NOATIME is more like disabling atime > updates for all types of files, not just files. I would like to know what > vfs people think, whether we need to use both flags at the same time. SB_NODIRATIME should be a subset of SB_NOATIME. So all you should need is SB_NOATIME to disable it for all files.