On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 07:25:10AM +0900, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> > Because peoples don't look at the access time that often. But it's usefull
> > for diagnostics and statistics.
> 
> well, i have not heard any complaints about mtime either. (other than mine)
> because mmap is rarely used, i guess.

You mean, mtime isn't updated for mmaped files either ? That's much more
annoying, because backup tools relies on mtime for incremental backups.

> you might want to use VM_PROT_NONE for VOP_GETPAGES in ufs_balloc_range as
> what it actually does is just holding pages without accessing them.
> then you can check VM_PROT_READ, which is more straightforward than
> VM_PROT_WRITE.
> 
> however, i still don't like the idea to update atime in VOP_GETPAGES.
> it sounds like "update randomly" to me.
> if we want to update atime for mmap, i prefer to do it when a file is mmap'ed.

And do it again when it's unmapped then. And the same for mtime, I guess.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--