lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-16 14:59    [W:0.072 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site