From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] vfs: Non-blockling buffered fs read (page cache only) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 00:40:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20150330074020.GC22229@infradead.org> References: <20150326202824.65d03787.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20150327100411.6823b9d7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150327100411.6823b9d7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-aio@kvack.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Milosz Tanski , LKML , Christoph Hellwig , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-aio@kvack.org" , Mel Gorman , Volker Lendecke , Tejun Heo , Jeff Moyer , Theodore Ts'o , Al Viro , Linux API , Michael Kerrisk , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:04:11AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > mm... I don't think we should be adding placeholders to the kernel API > to support code which hasn't been written, tested, reviewed, merged, > etc. It's possible none of this will ever happen and we end up with a > syscall nobody needs or uses. Plus it's always possible that during > this development we decide the pwrite2() interface needs alteration but > it's too late. > > What would be the downside of deferring pwrite2() until it's all > implemented? It _is_ implemented. I just decided to submit it separately as Miklos already has to deal with enough bikeshedding for his feature that I don't want to put the burden of dealing with the BS for the one I wrote on him. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux AIO, see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/ Don't email: aart@kvack.org