Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:58:05 -0400 | From | Chris Friesen <> | Subject | Re: statfs() / statvfs() syscall ballsup... |
| |
Joel Becker wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 05:01:44PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > >>Why don't you _share_ the App's cache with the kernel's? That's what >>mmap() and remap_file_pages() are for.
> Because you can't force flush/read. You can't say "I need you > to go to disk for this."
According to my man pages, this is exactly what msync() is for, no?
>>That's tough to guarantee at the platter level regardless of O_DIRECT, >>but otherwise: you have fdatasync() and msync().
> Platter level doesn't matter. Storage access level matters. > Node1 and Node2 have to see the same thing. As long as I am absolutely > sure that when Node1's write() returns, any subsequent read() on Node2 > will see the change (normal barrier stuff, really), it doesn't matter > what happend on the Storage.
Isn't that exactly what msync() exists for?
Chris
-- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.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/
| |