lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 05 Oct 2001 13:44:20 +0100
FromPadraig Brady <>
SubjectRe: Finegrained a/c/mtime was Re: Directory notification problem
Andi Kleen wrote:

>On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 11:15:04AM -0400, Alex Larsson wrote:
>>>Is a nanoseconds field the right choice though? In reality you might not 
>>have a nanosecond resolution timer, so you would miss changes that appear
>>on shorter timescale than the timer resolution. Wouldn't a generation 
>>counter, increased when ctime was updated, be a better solution?
>>>>Near any CPU has a cycle counter builtin now, which gives you ns like
>resolution. In theory you could still get collisions on MP systems, 
>but window is small enough that it can be ignored in practice.
>>-Andi>
But the point is you, only ever would want nano second resolution to make
sure you notice all changes to a file. A more general (and much simpler)
solution would be to gen_count++ every time a file's modified. What other
applications would require better than second resolution on files?

Padraig.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:04    [from the cache]
©2003-2008