Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Mar 2002 09:58:11 +0100 | From | Jan Hudec <> | Subject | Re: fadvise syscall? |
| |
> Followup to: <5.1.0.14.2.20020318000057.051d30e0@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk> > By author: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk> > In newsgroup: linux.dev.fs.devel > > > > Ok, so basically we want both fadvise() and open(2) semantics, with the > > open(2) being a superset of the fadvise() capabilities (some things no > > longer make sense to be specified once the file is open). They can of > > course both be calling the same common helpers inside the kernel... > > > > If they're open() flags, they should probably be controlled with > fcntl() rather than with a new system call.
Then posix_fadvise interface can be implemented in libc using fcntl.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Jan Hudec `Bulb' <bulb@ucw.cz> - 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/
| |