From 6503fbef433da29fe1f450e44c8eaca61888bcda Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lennart Poettering Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 17:25:57 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] update-done: ignore nanosecond file timestamp components, they are not reliable https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90192 (cherry picked from commit 329c542585cd92cb905990e3bf59eda16fd88cfb) Cherry-picked from: a38a3e0 Resolves: #1222517 --- src/update-done/update-done.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/update-done/update-done.c b/src/update-done/update-done.c index 561963e5eb..cb5cd6f4ab 100644 --- a/src/update-done/update-done.c +++ b/src/update-done/update-done.c @@ -36,9 +36,15 @@ static int apply_timestamp(const char *path, struct timespec *ts) { assert(ts); if (stat(path, &st) >= 0) { - /* Is the timestamp file already newer than the OS? If so, there's nothing to do. */ - if (st.st_mtim.tv_sec > ts->tv_sec || - (st.st_mtim.tv_sec == ts->tv_sec && st.st_mtim.tv_nsec >= ts->tv_nsec)) + /* Is the timestamp file already newer than the OS? If + * so, there's nothing to do. We ignore the nanosecond + * component of the timestamp, since some file systems + * do not support any better accuracy than 1s and we + * have no way to identify the accuracy + * available. Most notably ext4 on small disks (where + * 128 byte inodes are used) does not support better + * accuracy than 1s. */ + if (st.st_mtim.tv_sec > ts->tv_sec) return 0; /* It is older? Then let's update it */