lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Oct]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: how to write get_block?
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I really don't think it make sense to let write(2) to be SMP parallel as
> it would be unreliable and thus useless. So basically allowing more writes
> to enter the critical section looks an useless improvement and lose of
> robustness to me.

a) we must allow concurrent write operations for pipes (O_NONBLOCK).

b) are you sure that these statements are true for a large database?

I think the right aproach would be new functions [public, because needed
by nfsd and arch/*/kernel/sys*.c]

int inode_lock_write(inode, filp, offset, len);
...
int inode_lock_rename(inode_source,inode_dest);
...

and flags so that the f_ops implementation can choose the amount of
synchronization it needs.

Or you could add new function pointers to f_ops/i_ops for
synchronization.

--
Manfred


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.082 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site