| To: | jim owens <jowens@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3) |
| From: | Jim Rees <rees@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:41:18 -0400 |
| Cc: | Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@xxxxxxxxx>, Jamie Lokier <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <4909ADE0.1060205@hp.com> |
| References: | <20081029031645.GE4985@disturbed> <20081029091203.GA32545@infradead.org> <20081029092143.GA5953@wotan.suse.de> <20081029094417.GA21824@infradead.org> <20081029103029.GC5953@wotan.suse.de> <20081029122234.GE846@shareable.org> <490865E3.8070102@gmail.com> <1225292196.6448.263.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20081030021601.GF18041@wotan.suse.de> <4909ADE0.1060205@hp.com> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
jim owens wrote: AFAIK the fsync semantic comes from the days of dinosaurs, mainframes, and minicomputers... when a lot of operating systems had user-space libraries that buffered the I/O. On fsync(fd), the "fd2" data would still be in user-space. User space buffering happens in stdio, which is above the system call level. It's been that way since fsync() was first introduced, and is still that way today. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3), jim owens |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: do_sync() and XFSQA test 182 failures...., Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3), jim owens |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3), Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |