From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
y2038@lists.linaro.org, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] utimes: Clamp the timestamps in notify_change()
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:35:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxh3OMmVotx-v9Lnvwcs7zxeBs9Ag9Q0uUK6f2v2Yqto5Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191125164625.GB28608@fieldses.org>
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 6:46 PM J . Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 09:31:45PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > Push clamping timestamps down the call stack into notify_change(), so
> > in-kernel callers like nfsd and overlayfs will get similar timestamp
> > set behavior as utimes.
>
> So, nfsd has always bypassed timestamp_truncate() and we've never
> noticed till now? What are the symptoms? (Do timestamps go backwards
> after cache eviction on filesystems with large time granularity?)
Clamping seems to be new behavior since v5.4-rc1.
Before that clamping was done implicitly when hitting the disk IIUC,
so it was observed mostly after cache eviction.
>
> Looks like generic/402 has never run in my tests:
>
> generic/402 [not run] no kernel support for y2038 sysfs switch
>
The test in its current form is quite recent as well or at the _require
has changed recently.
See acb2ba78 - overlay: support timestamp range check
You'd probably need something similar for nfs (?)
Thanks,
Amir.
_______________________________________________
Y2038 mailing list
Y2038@lists.linaro.org
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/y2038
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
y2038@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] utimes: Clamp the timestamps in notify_change()
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 19:35:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxh3OMmVotx-v9Lnvwcs7zxeBs9Ag9Q0uUK6f2v2Yqto5Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191125164625.GB28608@fieldses.org>
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 6:46 PM J . Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 09:31:45PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > Push clamping timestamps down the call stack into notify_change(), so
> > in-kernel callers like nfsd and overlayfs will get similar timestamp
> > set behavior as utimes.
>
> So, nfsd has always bypassed timestamp_truncate() and we've never
> noticed till now? What are the symptoms? (Do timestamps go backwards
> after cache eviction on filesystems with large time granularity?)
Clamping seems to be new behavior since v5.4-rc1.
Before that clamping was done implicitly when hitting the disk IIUC,
so it was observed mostly after cache eviction.
>
> Looks like generic/402 has never run in my tests:
>
> generic/402 [not run] no kernel support for y2038 sysfs switch
>
The test in its current form is quite recent as well or at the _require
has changed recently.
See acb2ba78 - overlay: support timestamp range check
You'd probably need something similar for nfs (?)
Thanks,
Amir.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-25 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-24 19:31 [PATCH] utimes: Clamp the timestamps in notify_change() Amir Goldstein
2019-11-24 19:31 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-11-24 19:49 ` Al Viro
2019-11-24 19:49 ` Al Viro
2019-11-24 20:50 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-11-24 20:50 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-11-24 21:14 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-24 21:14 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-24 21:13 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-24 21:13 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-24 21:34 ` Al Viro
2019-11-24 21:34 ` Al Viro
2019-11-30 5:34 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-30 5:34 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-25 16:46 ` J . Bruce Fields
2019-11-25 16:46 ` J . Bruce Fields
2019-11-25 17:35 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
2019-11-25 17:35 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-11-25 18:16 ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-11-25 18:16 ` Deepa Dinamani
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAOQ4uxh3OMmVotx-v9Lnvwcs7zxeBs9Ag9Q0uUK6f2v2Yqto5Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=deepa.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=y2038@lists.linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.