From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755996AbdLONEE (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:04:04 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36086 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755787AbdLONEC (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:04:02 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BFAFF218C5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=jlayton@kernel.org Message-ID: <1513343039.20336.8.camel@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/19] btrfs: only dirty the inode in btrfs_update_time if something was changed From: Jeff Layton To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de, neilb@suse.de, bfields@fieldses.org, amir73il@gmail.com, jack@suse.de, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, Josef Bacik , Chris Mason , Omar Sandoval , David Howells Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:03:59 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20171213142017.23653-19-jlayton@kernel.org> References: <20171213142017.23653-1-jlayton@kernel.org> <20171213142017.23653-19-jlayton@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2 (3.26.2-1.fc27) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 09:20 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > From: Jeff Layton > > At this point, we know that "now" and the file times may differ, and we > suspect that the i_version has been flagged to be bumped. Attempt to > bump the i_version, and only mark the inode dirty if that actually > occurred or if one of the times was updated. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton > --- > fs/btrfs/inode.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/inode.c b/fs/btrfs/inode.c > index ac25389b39de..2e50a977fb06 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c > @@ -6106,19 +6106,20 @@ static int btrfs_update_time(struct inode *inode, struct timespec *now, > int flags) > { > struct btrfs_root *root = BTRFS_I(inode)->root; > + bool dirty = flags & ~S_VERSION; > > if (btrfs_root_readonly(root)) > return -EROFS; > > if (flags & S_VERSION) > - inode_inc_iversion(inode); > + dirty |= inode_maybe_inc_iversion(inode, dirty); > if (flags & S_CTIME) > inode->i_ctime = *now; > if (flags & S_MTIME) > inode->i_mtime = *now; > if (flags & S_ATIME) > inode->i_atime = *now; > - return btrfs_dirty_inode(inode); > + return dirty ? btrfs_dirty_inode(inode) : 0; > } > > /* I had some bogus handling for SB_LAZYTIME in the corresponding patch for generic_update_time. I've fixed in my tree, but now I'm wondering... Should btrfs not be dirtying the inode here if SB_LAZYTIME is set and the only update is to the atime? -- Jeff Layton