Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Feb 2006 23:41:42 +1100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: msync() behaviour broken for MS_ASYNC, revert patch? |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > >>Instead of >> LINUX_FADV_ASYNC_WRITE >> LINUX_FADV_WRITE_WAIT >> >> can we have something more consistent? Perhaps >> FADV_WRITE_ASYNC >> FADV_WRITE_SYNC > > > Nope, I had a bit of a think about this and decided that the two operations > which we need are: > >
Do you need to introduce a completely new concept 'wait upon writeout' though? Not to say they can't solve the problem but I don't think they are any more expressive and they definitely depart from the norm which has always been sync / async AFAIK.
It may be a very useful operation in kernel, but I think userspace either wants to definitely know the data is on disk (WRITE_SYNC), or give a hint to start writing (WRITE_ASYNC).
From a kernel implementation point of view, WRITE_SYNC may be doing several things (start writeout, wait writeout), but from userspace it is just a single logical operation.
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- 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/
| |