Re: [PATCH 2/3] fat: fix time updates for create and delete

[OGAWA Hirofumi]

Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> You have to think about compatibility with other FAT, not unix fs.
>
> Agreed, ctime is creation time, and there are comptability issues with
> the patch.
>
> But there is confusion about 'ctime' usage in the default code. When
> referring the code I found many instances except 'fat_fill_inode'
> where 'ctime' is updated as if it is 'change time' instead of
> 'creation time' like in functions: fat_write_end(), fat_cont_expend(),
> fat_free(), vfat_add_entry().
>
> As a case when I check using a simple case:
> dd if=/dev/zero of=./samplefile bs=4096 count=10
> => check file timings
> wait for 2minutes
> Now, append to this file
> echo "this is simple string to be appended" >> samplefile
> => check file timings
>
> I can see - it resulted in change in 'ctime' and 'mtime'.
> Now, when Connecting this Drive to Windows - it shows the time of
> 'second write' as the CREATION time as well as "Modification time".
> If you agree that this is a strange/problem. I can try to fix the
> timestamp of linux FAT checking this compatability pattern to the
> nearest.
> Let me know your opinion.

Yes. It is strange behavior, and it is what I was calling historical.
If we changed this behavior now, user can be notice to change of
historical behavior.  Also, if we didn't change this, it is strange as
FAT-fs compatibility.

If I can design from scratch, probably I will choose FAT-fs
compatibility at first. But we can't, and I don't have strong opinion to
change current behavior.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/