Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
> Alan and/or Linus:
>
> Am I misreading this or is the Linux implementation of sync() based on
> making the shutdown scripts pause until disk i/o is done? Because I don't
> think commercial unices work that way, I think they work as SuS
> specifies. More reason to rethink this in 2.4 as well as 2.5 and get the
> possible live lock out of the kernel.
I don't think SuSv2 can be any more clear than:
> The writing, although scheduled, is not necessarily complete
> upon return from sync().
Quoting from http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/sync.html
As I mentioned in the other message, IMHO we need some way to introduce
a global system I/O barrier, and then wait for all I/O scheduled before
that barrier to complete. My suggestion for naming was the "checkpoint"
system call.
Jeff
-- Jeff Garzik | "I went through my candy like hot oatmeal Building 1024 | through an internally-buttered weasel." MandrakeSoft | - goats.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:00:52 EST