[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111201122425.GA16274@localhost>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 20:24:25 +0800
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: Make write(2) interruptible by a fatal signal
Hi,
How are we going to do with this patch?
> This patch makes write interruptible by SIGKILL.
Let me try to summarize the objective impacts of (not) merging this
patch, and would like to hear more opinions from experienced users.
- w/o patch
BEHAVIOR:
write(2) insists to complete even when the user really wants to stop it.
IMPACT:
It could be annoying to experience slow responses to "kill -9" when
it's a large write to a slow device, for example,
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/nokia/zero bs=100M
- w/ patch
BEHAVIOR:
write(2) aborts quickly with possible partial write on SIGKILL
IMPACT:
The partial write might lead to data corruption somewhere, sometime
(the possibility is low but real) and bring trouble to some users.
Thanks,
Fengguang
--
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