Re: [PATCH] fsync_range, was: Re: munmap, msync: synchronization

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > Add another question: is there any piece of sync_file_range() 
> > functionality that could or should be incorporated in this API?
> 
> I don't think so.  sync_file_range is a complete mess and impossible
> to use correctly for data integrity operations.  Especially the whole
> notion that submitting I/O and waiting for it are separate operations
> is incompatible with a data integrity call.

I guess it's also to give the application a way to nudge a preferred
asynchronous writeback order, prior to a synchronous wait.  If the
application knows there's a lot of dirty data being generated over
time prior to needing a short fdatasync, it might see it as beneficial
to tell the kernel to start writing that data sooner, so the fdatasync
delay will be shorter.

-- Jamie
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux