On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 11:26:58AM -0400, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com> said:
> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 05:42:25PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > Yes, for a good reason: performance.
>
> > Performance of what? I'm not asking for a cache flush, I'm just
> > asking for write(/dev/hda1) being identical (would it be working or
> > non-working) to write(/dev/hda+appropriate sector offset). Nothing
> > more, nothing less. This has nothing to do with whether there is a
> > mounted filesystem in the given partition. It is only the presence of
> > the mounted filesystem shows the difference.
>
> This means the mounted filesystem has to have mechanisms to check if
> something has been changed beneath it[...]
Read better. "would it be working or non-working". Non-working is ok
if both write(/dev/hda) and write(/dev/hda1) are non-working, because
it means a special mechanism is needed no matter what to write the
boot sector. It's the "it works thru /dev/hda1, it doesn't thru
/dev/hda" that is wrong.
OG.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 15 2000 - 21:00:13 EST