[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [fuse-devel] utimensat fails to update ctime
Jean-Pierre André <> writes:

> Hi again,


>> Well, the problem seems in fuse_lib_setattr() and ntfs_fuse_setattr()
>> (lowlevel op too).
>> The both functions is requiring "ATIME | MTIME". Doesn't it mean the
>> ntfs-3g can't set only MTIME like above utimensat()?
> With ntfs-3g this is not directly possible, because
> the interface does not provide flags telling which
> timestamps should be updated. The only way would
> be fuse feeding both values (even though unchanged)
> before calling ntfs-3g. This is true for all versions of
> ntfs-3g.

Yes, with fuse_operations. It is why I'm saying the issue is libfuse or

But I noticed ntfs-3g is including libfuse-lite sources and use it with
static link (I might be wrong here, because I just looked ntfs-3g source
slightly). AFAIK, the fuse of kernel part is passing the flags of some
sort of detail always.

[BTW, the code of that part in kernel may be the following,


if (ivalid & ATTR_ATIME) {
arg->valid |= FATTR_ATIME;
arg->atime = iattr->ia_atime.tv_sec;
arg->atimensec = iattr->ia_atime.tv_nsec;
if (!(ivalid & ATTR_ATIME_SET))
arg->valid |= FATTR_ATIME_NOW;
if ((ivalid & ATTR_MTIME) && update_mtime(ivalid)) {
arg->valid |= FATTR_MTIME;
arg->mtime = iattr->ia_mtime.tv_sec;
arg->mtimensec = iattr->ia_mtime.tv_nsec;
if (!(ivalid & ATTR_MTIME_SET))
arg->valid |= FATTR_MTIME_NOW;

So, if libfuse-lite was fixed to supported that update request, it would
be able to do even if fuse_operations. I.e. in libfuse-lite, emulate
"ATIME | MTIME" request if "MTIME" only (pass unchanged original atime),
then call ->utime() callback. (or adds new utime2 callback with flags, or
something other solutions)

Or, if that request is known limitation of fuse_operations, I think it
would be clear state and ok. The fs needs to use lowlevel op to support

> With lowntfs-3g (release candidate only), this could
> be possible.... but this is not implemented, as the
> case was never found up to now. I can provide you
> with a patch,... if fuse can feed in the flags selectively.

Yes. AFAIK, fuse of kernel part is passing FATTR_MTIME without
FATTR_ATIME to userland (i.e. FUSE_SET_ATTR_ATIME and
FUSE_SET_ATTR_MTIME in libfuse).

I think it's good to implement if it's not design decision of ntfs-3g.

[BTW, just my guess though, it would be good to use "if (vaild &
ATTR_XXX)" style, not "switch()" to support various combinations of

OGAWA Hirofumi <>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-22 14:33    [W:0.109 / U:1.652 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site