xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: to compare journalised file systems

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: to compare journalised file systems
From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 23:09:48 +0100
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Stephen Tweedie <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20021017000107.A21179@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from ak@xxxxxxx on Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 12:01:07AM +0200
References: <20021016203853.GH27982@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210161738120.5976-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20021016214759.GI27982@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20021017000107.A21179@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
Hi,

On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 12:01:07AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:

> No that's not true. The VFS doesn't know about these flags as far as 
> I know. You have to handle them in fs specific code.
> 
> Even more interesting looking at the source and testing it at least append 
> only
> is broken for ext2/ext3 - generic_file_llseek doesn't check for it
> so while you're required to open such a file O_APPEND lseek still works fine.

lseek is ignored on O_APPEND files --- the write always re-seeks to
EOF.  pwrite goes down that same code path too so it also gets the
append enforced.  In your testing were you testing real writes, or
just the lseeks?

Cheers,
 Stephen


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>