[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200701201719.15341.vda.linux@googlemail.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:19:15 +0100
From: Denis Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
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, akpm@...l.org,
mjt@....msk.ru
Subject: Re: O_DIRECT question
On Thursday 11 January 2007 16:50, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > Speaking of which, why did we obsolete raw devices? And/or why not just
> > go with a minimal O_DIRECT on block device support? Not a rhetorical
> > question -- I wasn't involved in the discussions when they happened, so
> > I would be interested.
>
> Lots of people want to put their databases in a file. Partitions really
> weren't nearly flexible enough. So the whole raw device or O_DIRECT just
> to the block device thing isn't really helping any.
>
> > O_DIRECT is still crazily racy versus pagecache operations.
>
> Yes. O_DIRECT is really fundamentally broken. There's just no way to fix
> it sanely. Except by teaching people not to use it, and making the normal
> paths fast enough (and that _includes_ doing things like dropping caches
> more aggressively, but it probably would include more work on the device
> queue merging stuff etc etc).
What will happen if we just make open ignore O_DIRECT? ;)
And then anyone who feels sad about is advised to do it
like described here:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2002/5/11/58
--
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