Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:58:55 +0000 | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/5] revoke: core code |
| |
> I'm not sure that running do_fsync() will guarantee that all sys_write() > callers will have finished their syscall. Probably they will have, in > practice. But there is logic in the sync paths to deliberately bale out > if we're competing with ongoing dirtyings, to avoid livelocking.
For device files you really need to call into the device driver for this (->flush etc).
> However, modifying i_size like this might be a problem - the inode could be > dirty and it'll get written to disk! Perhaps we could change i_size_read() > to cheat and to return zero if there's a revoke in progress.
The cheating is a bit messier than that - you might be revoking on a cluster file system and I'm still trying to get my head around what the semantics for that are. Lying about sizes will break the coherency protocols I think
Serious question - do we actually need revoke() on a normal file ? BSD has never had this, SYS5 has never had this.
Alan - 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/
| |