"Peter T. Breuer" <ptb@it.uc3m.es> writes:
> "A month of sundays ago Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:"
>> On 2002-09-03T18:29:02,
>> "Peter T. Breuer" <ptb@it.uc3m.es> said:
>>
>> > The directory entry would certainly have to be reread after a write
>> > operation on disk that touched it - or more simply, the directory entry
>> > would have to be reread every time it were needed, i.e. be uncached.
>>
>> *ouch* Sure. Right. You just have to read it from scratch every time. How
>> would you make readdir work?
>
> Well, one has to read it from scratch. I'll set about seeing how to do.
> CLues welcome.
Just an idea, I don't know how well this works what with the 'IDE
can't do write barriers right' and related effects:
- Allow all nodes to cache as many blocks as they wish
- The atomic operation "update this block" includes "invalidate this
block, if cached" broadcast to all nodes
Performance would certainly become an issue; depending on the
architecture bus sniffing as in certain MP cache consistency protocols
might be feasible (I, node 3, see a transfer from node 1 going to
block #42, which is in my cache; so I update my cache using the data
part of the block transfer as it comes by on the bus).
So long,
Joe
-- "I use emacs, which might be thought of as a thermonuclear word processor." -- Neal Stephenson, "In the beginning... was the command line" - 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 - 22:00:21 EST