![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Josef Sipek wrote: > On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:34:09PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > ... > >>Can we get rid of the whole thing, confusing memory barriers and all? >>Nobody uses anything but the default sync_page > > > I feel like I must say this: there are some file systems that live > outside the kernel (at least for now) that do _NOT_ use the default > sync_page. All the stackable file systems that are based on FiST [1], > such as Unionfs [2] and eCryptfs (currently in -mm) [3] (respective > authors CC'd). As an example, Unionfs must decide which lower file > system page to sync (since it may have several to chose from). OK, noted. Thanks. Luckily for them it looks like sync_page might stay for other reasons (eg. raid) ;) Any good reasons they are not in the tree? > > Josef "Jeff" Sipek. > > [1] http://www.filesystems.org > [2] http://unionfs.filesystems.org > [3] http://ecryptfs.sourceforge.net -- 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-05-30 08:47 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||