[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: fadvise syscall?

> >> I disagree, and here's the main reasons:
> >>
> >> * fadvise(2) usefulness extends past open(2). It may be useful to call
> >> it at various points during runtime.
> >
> >open(/proc/self/fd/0, O_NEW_FLAGS)?
> So to use fadvise(), the system must have /proc mounted?

I think it is way more feasible than adding new syscall.
Casualities in World Trade Center: ~3k dead inside the building,
cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.179 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site