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

[Jamie Lokier]

Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> > >  - O_RSYNC basically means we need to commit atime updates before a
> > >    read returns, right?
> > 
> > No, that's not it.
> > 
> > O_RSYNC on its own just means the data is successfully transferred to 
> > the calling process (always the case).
> > 
> > O_RSYNC|O_DSYNC means that if a read request hits data that is currently 
> > in a cache and not yet on the medium, then the write to medium is 
> > successful before the read succeeds.
> > 
> > O_RSYNC|O_SYNC means the same plus the integrity of file meta 
> > information (access time etc).
> 
> On several unixes, O_RSYNC means it will send the read to the
> hardware, not relying on the cache.  This can be used to verify the
> data which was written earlier, whether by O_DSYNC or fdatasync.

I'm sure I read that in a couple of OS man pages, but I can't find it
again.  Maybe it was something more obscure than the mainstream
unices; maybe I imagined it.  Ho hum.  For now, forget I said anythng.

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