Re: Direct IO and Page cache

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:02:31 -0400, Kumar amit mehta said:

> So leaving the hardware at the mercy of the application doesn't sound
> like a good practice. This __may__ compromise kernel stability too. Also
> think of this:

In what possible way does it compromise kernel stability?:
>
> In app1:
> fdx = open("blah" , O_RW|O_DIRECT);
> write(fdx,buf,sizeof(buf));
>
> In app2(unaware of app1):
> fdy = open("blah", O_RW);
> write(fdy,buf, sizeof(buf));
>
> I think this isn't highly unlikely to do, and if you agree with me then
> we may end up with same could-be/would-be data-corruption. Now who should
> be blamed here, app1, app2

You blame the idiot programmer who didn't use file locking, and/or the idiot
user who ran the two programs.

This isn't even about O_DIRECT - try writing two programs that both
basically do a 'write 1M of data, sleep 10 seconds' using stdio to the
same file, and see what happens....

Attachment: pgpb8uvcwz5Tr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]
  Powered by Linux