[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110616115156.GA3766@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 07:51:56 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@...il.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Asias He <asias.hejun@...il.com>,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native Linux KVM tool v2
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 01:40:45PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Filesystems that cannot guarantee that should map their
> sync_file_range() implementation to fdatasync() or so, right?
Filesystems aren't even told about sync_file_range, it's purely a VM
thing, which is the root of the problem.
In-kernel we have all the infrastructure for a real ranged
fsync/fdatasync, and once we get a killer users for that can triviall
export it at the syscall level. I don't think mapping sync_file_range
with it's weird set of flags and confusing behaviour to it is a good
idea, though.
--
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