"A month of sundays ago David Lang wrote:"
> Peter, the thing that you seem to be missing is that direct mode only
> works for writes, it doesn't force a filesystem to go to the hardware for
> reads.
Yes it does. I've checked! Well, at least I've checked that writing
then reading causes the reads to get to the device driver. I haven't
checked what reading twice does.
If it doesn't cause the data to be read twice, then it ought to, and
I'll fix it (given half a clue as extra pay ..:-)
> for many filesystems you cannot turn off their internal caching of data
> (metadata for some, all data for others)
Well, let's take things one at a time. Put in a VFS mechanism and then
convert some FSs to use it.
> so to implement what you are after you will have to modify the filesystem
> to not cache anything, since you aren't going to do this for every
Yes.
> filesystem you end up only haivng this option on the one(s) that you
> modify.
I intend to make the generic mechanism attractive.
> if you have a single (or even just a few) filesystems that have this
> option you may as well include the locking/syncing software in them rather
> then modifying the VFS layer.
Why? Are you advocating a particular approach? Yes, I agree that that
is a possible way to go - but I will want the extra VFS ops anyway,
and will want to modify the particular fs to use them, no?
Peter
-
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 Sep 07 2002 - 22:00:18 EST