On Fri, 2025-05-30 at 02:17 -0600, Yangtao Li wrote:
> We don't support atime updates of any kind,
> because hfs actually does not have atime.
>
> dirCrDat: LongInt; {date and time of creation}
> dirMdDat: LongInt; {date and time of last modification}
> dirBkDat: LongInt; {date and time of last backup}
>
> filCrDat: LongInt; {date and time of creation}
> filMdDat: LongInt; {date and time of last modification}
> filBkDat: LongInt; {date and time of last backup}
>
> Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/hfs/super.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/hfs/super.c b/fs/hfs/super.c
> index fe09c2093a93..9fab84b157b4 100644
> --- a/fs/hfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/hfs/super.c
> @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ static int hfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
> sbi->sb = sb;
> sb->s_op = &hfs_super_operations;
> sb->s_xattr = hfs_xattr_handlers;
> - sb->s_flags |= SB_NODIRATIME;
> + sb->s_flags |= SB_NOATIME;
I don't agree with this patch. From my point of view, SB_NODIRATIME flag is
associated with nodiratime mount option and SB_NOATIME is associated with
noatime mount option. I prefer to have it both.
Thanks,
Slava.
> mutex_init(&sbi->bitmap_lock);
>
> res = hfs_mdb_get(sb);
