[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: msync() behaviour broken for MS_ASYNC, revert patch?
    Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
    > > If so, what was the change?
    > 2.4.9 behaved like current 2.6 --- on MS_ASYNC, it did a
    > set_page_dirty() which means the page will get picked up by the next
    > 5-second bdflush pass. But later 2.4 kernels were changed so that they
    > started MS_ASYNC IO immediately with filemap_fdatasync() (which is
    > asynchronous regarding the new IO, but which blocks synchronously if
    > there is already old IO in flight on the page.)
    > That was reverted back to the earlier, 2.4.9 behaviour in the 2.5
    > series.

    It was 2.5.68.

    Thanks, that's very helpful.

    msync(0) has always had behaviour consistent with the <=2.4.9 and
    >=2.5.68 MS_ASYNC behaviour, is that right?

    If so, programs may as well "#define MS_ASYNC 0" on Linux, to get well
    defined and consistent behaviour. It would be nice to change the
    definition in libc to zero, but I don't think it's possible because
    msync(MS_SYNC|MS_ASYNC) needs to fail.

    -- Jamie
    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 14:02    [W:0.032 / U:63.532 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site