linux-kernel - Re: adding proper O_SYNC/O_DSYNC, was Re: O

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:46:31 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: adding proper O_SYNC/O_DSYNC, was Re: O_DIRECT and barriers

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 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IZ01704 :
> 
>     Error description
> 
>        LINUX O_DIRECT/O_SYNC TAKES TOO MANY IOS

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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/