Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Dec 2006 10:45:08 +0000 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drop page cache of a single file |
| |
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 02:29:26AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 15:19:04 +0800 > Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yanmin: I've been using the fadvise tool from > > http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/ext3-tools.tar.gz > > > > It's a nice tool: > > > > % fadvise > > Usage: fadvise filename offset length advice [loops] > > advice: normal sequential willneed noreuse dontneed asyncwrite writewait > > % fadvise /var/sparse 0 0x7fffffff dontneed > > > > I was a bit reluctant to point at that because it has nasty hacks to make > it mostly-work on old glibc's which don't implement posix_fadvise(). > > Hopefully if you're running a recent distro, you have glibc support for > fadvise() and it's possible to write a portable version of that app which > doesn't need to know about per-arch syscall numbers.
And note that if it gets implemented on ARM on pre-fadvise() glibc, the syscall argument order is rather non-standard: fd, action, start, size rather than fd, start, size, action - since otherwise we run out of registers with EABI.
The kernel community needs to get a grip with the implementation of new syscalls - we need a process where architecture maintainers get to review the arguments _prior_ to them being accepted into the kernel. That way we can avoid silly architecture specific syscall changes like this.
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: - 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/
| |