Re: Should raw I/O be added to the kernel?

Matthew Jacob (mjacob@feral.com)
Mon, 21 Dec 1998 17:07:57 -0800 (PST)


On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Larry McVoy wrote:

> "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU> sayeth:
> : As far as I know, POSIX has always required that fsync() return when the
> : cache was flushed to disk, and I didn't think there were any fsync()
> : implementations that didn't follow this rule.
>
> Part of the problem is that OS implementations have sometimes forgotten to
> sync associated metadata as part of fsync(). Given that people may have
> been bitten by this in the past, they don't always trust fsync() to do the
> right thing.
>
> In the raw I/O case, the application is managing the meta data so it
> can do whatever it wants.

And it to doesn't really matter in a number of implementations. For
example, ConvexOS has a patchable variable (defaults to 'true') which
allows all synchronous operations to actually be B_ASYNC>

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