From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C5CC0502A for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2022 13:24:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229827AbiH3NYs (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:24:48 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42706 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229484AbiH3NYr (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:24:47 -0400 Received: from fieldses.org (fieldses.org [IPv6:2600:3c00:e000:2f7::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EA0CF2; Tue, 30 Aug 2022 06:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by fieldses.org (Postfix, from userid 2815) id 279875FF7; Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:24:43 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 fieldses.org 279875FF7 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fieldses.org; s=default; t=1661865883; bh=kiFZ7lPyA7HTC4vyRAxhN92WkWxK7wUpm+dV4qOIgZ8=; h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From:From; b=Nf36xb9rXfFGjVLBbMApNpIsXTzE8YkdK1hXQKX0LIG4aE5uqu40B8r9SDNAy5zvl yFkby6QMMofGlZI0ZzDu2/evtTnYejNDoCWY31ec7vxzAy36igLSpogZSRKZB5cvZA AenBPsSONL821mtDhhLoo8b+qko91m9EJCxicWJA= Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:24:43 -0400 To: Jeff Layton Cc: NeilBrown , Dave Chinner , tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, djwong@kernel.org, trondmy@hammerspace.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, zohar@linux.ibm.com, xiubli@redhat.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com, lczerner@redhat.com, jack@suse.cz, brauner@kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ceph@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Colin Walters Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] iversion: update comments with info about atime updates Message-ID: <20220830132443.GA26330@fieldses.org> References: <20220826214703.134870-1-jlayton@kernel.org> <20220826214703.134870-2-jlayton@kernel.org> <20220829075651.GS3600936@dread.disaster.area> <549776abfaddcc936c6de7800b6d8249d97d9f28.camel@kernel.org> <166181389550.27490.8200873228292034867@noble.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) From: bfields@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 07:40:02AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > Yes, saying only that it must be different is intentional. What we > really want is for consumers to treat this as an opaque value for the > most part [1]. Therefore an implementation based on hashing would > conform to the spec, I'd think, as long as all of the relevant info is > part of the hash. It'd conform, but it might not be as useful as an increasing value. E.g. a client can use that to work out which of a series of reordered write replies is the most recent, and I seem to recall that can prevent unnecessary invalidations in some cases. --b.