[PATCH RESEND] ubifs: Introduce a mount option of force_atime.

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 15:13 +0800, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
> On 06/26/2015 03:01 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 09:17 +0800, Dongsheng Yang wrote:
> ...
> 
> > This means that if a file-system (e.g., UBIFS or JFFS2) never supported
> > atime, it is harder to add atime support without breaking the old
> > behavior.
> >
> > What if we push the two "set NOATIME flag" lines of code down to
> > individual file-systems, instead of having it at the VFS level?
> 
>     TO be sure I understand it correctly, do you mean pushing the flags
> parsing work to individual file-systems? Then we can set the default
> behavior in file-system itself.

No, I mean removing these 2 lines from do_mount()

      /* Default to relatime */
      mnt_flags |= MNT_RELATIME;

and add them to the

struct file_system_type->mount()

of every individual file-system (e.g., ext4_mount()).

>     But there is another problem I called as problem 2 in my last mail.
> That we can not distinguish:
>     -o - default behavior (*no atime*)
>     -o atime - atime support

-o atime does not mean anything from the kernel POW, it is only
user-space tools which may translate it to something meaningful for the
kernel. No file-systems can distinguish these two anyway. So I would say
this is not a problem, people have to use 'strictatime' instead.

What do you think about this as the alternative to the
UBIFS_ATIME_SUPPORT configuration switch, which will introduce
additional churn?