Re: adding proper O_SYNC/O_DSYNC, was Re: O_DIRECT and barriers

From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Fri Aug 28 2009 - 19:46:46 EST

On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 12:06:23AM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > - given that our current O_SYNC really is and always has been actuall
> > Posix O_DSYNC
> Are you sure about this?
> >From :
> Error description

That is for GPFS, and out of tree filesystem with binary components.
It could be that they took linux O_SYNC for real O_SYNC. Any filesystem
using the generic helpers in Linux has gotten the O_DSYNC semantics at
least as long as I have worked on Linux filesystems, which is getting
close to 10 years now. I'll do some code archaelogy before we'll move
with this to be sure.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at