| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:45:40 +0100 From: Denis Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com> To: "Nate Diller" <nate.diller@...il.com> Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>, andersen@...epoet.org, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...l.org>, "Michael Tokarev" <mjt@....msk.ru>, "Chris Mason" <chris.mason@...cle.com>, "dean gaudet" <dean@...tic.org>, Viktor <vvp01@...ox.ru>, Aubrey <aubreylee@...il.com>, "Hua Zhong" <hzhong@...il.com>, "Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org, kenneth.w.chen@...el.com Subject: Re: O_DIRECT question On Sunday 14 January 2007 10:11, Nate Diller wrote: > On 1/12/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> wrote: > Most applications don't get the kind of performance analysis that > Digeo was doing, and even then, it's rather lucky that we caught that. > So I personally think it'd be best for libc or something to simulate > the O_STREAM behavior if you ask for it. That would simplify things > for the most common case, and have the side benefit of reducing the > amount of extra code an application would need in order to take > advantage of that feature. Sounds like you are saying that making O_DIRECT really mean O_STREAM will work for everybody (including db people, except that they will moan a lot about "it isn't _real_ O_DIRECT!!! Linux suxxx"). I don't care about that. -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists