On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > OK. But currently we have an implementation that > > 1) doesn't do any of this, unless readahead is disabled Sure. But removing even the conceptual support? Not a good idea. > And in addition, splice-in and splice-out can return a short count or > even zero count if the filesystem invalidates the cached pages during > the splicing (data became stale for example). Are these the right > semantics? I'm not sure. What does that really have with splice() and removing the features? Why don't you just fix that issue? Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
