From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: adding proper O_SYNC/O_DSYNC, was Re: O_DIRECT and barriers Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:46:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20090828234631.GA28506@infradead.org> References: <20090821142635.GB30617@infradead.org> <20090821152459.GC6929@shareable.org> <20090821174525.GA28861@infradead.org> <20090822005006.GA22530@shareable.org> <20090824023422.GA775@infradead.org> <20090827143459.GB31453@shareable.org> <20090827171044.GA5427@infradead.org> <4A96C14C.8040105@redhat.com> <20090828154647.GA15808@infradead.org> <20090828230623.GD8036@shareable.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Ulrich Drepper , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Jamie Lokier Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:43201 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750878AbZH1Xqf (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:46:35 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090828230623.GD8036@shareable.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 12:06:23AM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > - given that our current O_SYNC really is and always has been actuall > > Posix O_DSYNC > > Are you sure about this? > > >From http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IZ01704 : > > Error description > > LINUX O_DIRECT/O_SYNC TAKES TOO MANY IOS That is for GPFS, and out of tree filesystem with binary components. It could be that they took linux O_SYNC for real O_SYNC. Any filesystem using the generic helpers in Linux has gotten the O_DSYNC semantics at least as long as I have worked on Linux filesystems, which is getting close to 10 years now. I'll do some code archaelogy before we'll move with this to be sure.