lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: O_DIRECT question
Date
On Thursday 11 January 2007 16:50, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > Speaking of which, why did we obsolete raw devices? And/or why not just
> > go with a minimal O_DIRECT on block device support? Not a rhetorical
> > question -- I wasn't involved in the discussions when they happened, so
> > I would be interested.
>
> Lots of people want to put their databases in a file. Partitions really
> weren't nearly flexible enough. So the whole raw device or O_DIRECT just
> to the block device thing isn't really helping any.
>
> > O_DIRECT is still crazily racy versus pagecache operations.
>
> Yes. O_DIRECT is really fundamentally broken. There's just no way to fix
> it sanely. Except by teaching people not to use it, and making the normal
> paths fast enough (and that _includes_ doing things like dropping caches
> more aggressively, but it probably would include more work on the device
> queue merging stuff etc etc).

What will happen if we just make open ignore O_DIRECT? ;)

And then anyone who feels sad about is advised to do it
like described here:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2002/5/11/58
--
vda
-
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: 2007-01-20 18:11    [W:0.118 / U:22.332 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site