Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)
From: Andrew Morton (akpm_at_osdl.org)
Date: 09/15/05
- Previous message: Shaohua Li: "[PATCH]FPU context corrupted after resume"
- In reply to: Machida, Hiroyuki: "[PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)"
- Next in thread: OGAWA Hirofumi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)"
- Reply: OGAWA Hirofumi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 19:48:20 -0700 To: "Machida, Hiroyuki" <machida@sm.sony.co.jp>
"Machida, Hiroyuki" <machida@sm.sony.co.jp> wrote:
>
> This patch fixes miss-sync issue on write() system call.
> This updates inode attrs flags, mtime and ctime on every
> comit_write call, due to locking.
This all seems wrong.
Why does fatfs have file_operations.write pointing at do_sync_write()
rather than generic_file_write()?
Why does fatfs have a custom .aio_write() rather than using
generic_file_aio_write()?
If fatfs can use all the standard library functions, all this inode
dirtying and O_SYNC/-o sync handling shoud just work.
-
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/
- Previous message: Shaohua Li: "[PATCH]FPU context corrupted after resume"
- In reply to: Machida, Hiroyuki: "[PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)"
- Next in thread: OGAWA Hirofumi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)"
- Reply: OGAWA Hirofumi: "Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
