![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Chris Mason wrote: > On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 09:08, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>On Tue, 2004-03-30 at 23:21, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> >> >>>For IDE, O_DIRECT and O_SYNC can use special "FUA" commands, which don't >>>return until the data is on the platter. >> >>fsync() is still really nasty, because that can require that we wait on >>IO that was submitted by the VM before we knew that there was a >>synchronous IO wait coming. > > > Yes, it gets ugly in a hurry. Jeff, look at the whole thread about the > O_DIRECT read vs buffered write races. I don't think we can use FUA for Yes, I'm aware of the thread... > fsync or O_SYNC without using it for every write. Why not for O_SYNC? Is some crazy userspace application flipping this bit on and off rapidly? > We might be able to get away with using it on O_DIRECT. Nod. Jeff - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:02 [W:0.057 / U:0.230 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||