On Fri, 15 July 2005 04:06:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > +
> > + /* There is no sane reason to use O_DIRECT */
> > + BUG_ON(file->f_flags & O_DIRECT);
>
> err, this seems like an easy way for people to make the kernel go BUG.
Is there a sane use for O_DIRECT in combination with sendfile()?
If not, I'd like to change sys_sendfile() and return -EINVAL for
O_DIRECT file descriptors.
> > + if (unlikely(signal_pending(current)))
> > + return -EINTR;
>
> This doesn't help. The reason we've avoided file-to-file sendfile() is
> that it can cause applications to get uninterruptibly stuck in the kernel
> for ages. This code doesn't solve that problem. It needs to handle
> signal_pending() inside the main loop.
>
> And it probably needs to return a sane value (number of bytes copied)
> rather than -EINTR.
Makes sense.
> I don't know if we want to add this feature, really. It's such a
> specialised thing.
With union mount and cowlink, there are two users already. cp(1)
could use it as well, even if the improvement is quite minimal.
Jörn
--
All art is but imitation of nature.
-- Lucius Annaeus Seneca
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |