linux-kernel - Re: [patch] RFC directio: partial writes support

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:	Sat, 27 Feb 2010 14:10:35 +0300
From:	Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
To:	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	"linux-fsdevel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] RFC directio: partial writes support

Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> writes:

> Can someone please describe me why directio deny partial writes.
> For example if someone try to write 100Mb but file system has less
> data it return ENOSPC in the middle of block allocation.
> All allocated blocks will be truncated (it may be 100Mb -4k) end
> ENOSPC will be returned. As far as i remember direct_io always act
> like this, but i never asked why?
> Why do we have to give up all the progress we made?
> In fact partial writes are possible in case of holes, when we 
> fall back to buffered write. XFS implemented partial writes.
>
> I've done trivial changes and it works like charm. 
> Let's enable partial writes support and allow caller to define
> this behavior.
add Andrew to cc:
--
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/