[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49CABA44.90004@garzik.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:12:04 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, David Rees <drees76@...il.com>,
Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] issue storage device flush via sync_blockdev() (was Re:
Linux 2.6.29)
Alan Cox wrote:
>> This is a simple step that would cover a lot of cases... sync(2)
>> calls sync_blockdev(), and many filesystems do as well via the generic
>> filesystem helper file_fsync (fs/sync.c).
>
> file_fsync probably needs to pass down more information so you can make
> this a mount option. It's going to depend on the application whether the
> flush is good bad or indifferent.
file_fsync is only used by ancient legacy filesystems, who specifically
don't want to bother with anything more complicated: HFS, HFS+, ADFS,
AFFS, FAT, bfs, UFS, NTFS, qnx4.
IOW they _already_ consciously implement fsync(2) as "flush ENTIRE
blockdev".
I think it is worth it to simply wait and see if mount options are even
wanted.
Jeff
--
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