On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:08:02AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Jan Hudec wrote:
> >Then posix_fadvise interface can be implemented in libc using fcntl.
> It is far better for future-proofing the interface IMO if fadvise is
> implementing directly. Hints are less important than open O_xxx flags
> or F_xxx flags, because an implementation can safely ignore 100% of the
> fadvise hints, if it so chooses. One cannot say the same thing for
> open/fcntl flags.
There is nothing to say that fadvise(...) shouldn't call fcntl(F_ADVISE, ...).
If it fits in with open(), then it might just fit in with F_GETFL /
F_SETFL as well.
I prefer generalization, especially for non-critical functions that should
not be called 1,000,000 a second, such as fadvise().
mark
-- mark@mielke.cc/markm@ncf.ca/markm@nortelnetworks.com __________________________ . . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder |\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ | | | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, CanadaOne ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them...
- 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 : Sat Mar 23 2002 - 22:00:15 EST