Re: fadvise syscall?

Jeff Garzik
2002-03-18T08:08:16Z

Andrew Morton wrote:

>posix_fadvise() looks to be a fine interface:
>

>We'll need to cheat a bit on the offset/len thing for NORMAL and
>SEQUENTIAL - just apply it to the whole file - we don't want to have to
>attach an arbitrary number of silly range objects to each file for this.
>(We already cheat a bit this way with msync).
>
yep

>Given this, I don't see a persuasive need to implement a non-standard
>interface. It takes an off_t, so posix_fadvise64() is also needed.
>
agreed WRT non-standard.

Are we required to have both foo and foo64 variants? If I had my
druthers, I would just do the foo64 version.

>
>A 2.4 implementation could be done any time. If anyone decides to
>do this, please let me know...
>

count me down as interested after my current project... If someone else
does it, more power to them...

Jeff