On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 12:06:23AM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > - given that our current O_SYNC really is and always has been actuall > > Posix O_DSYNC > > Are you sure about this? > > >From http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IZ01704 : > > Error description > > LINUX O_DIRECT/O_SYNC TAKES TOO MANY IOS That is for GPFS, and out of tree filesystem with binary components. It could be that they took linux O_SYNC for real O_SYNC. Any filesystem using the generic helpers in Linux has gotten the O_DSYNC semantics at least as long as I have worked on Linux filesystems, which is getting close to 10 years now. I'll do some code archaelogy before we'll move with this to be sure. -- 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
