Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)

"Machida, Hiroyuki" <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)
  - From: OGAWA Hirofumi <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)
  - From: "Machida, Hiroyuki" <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: [PATCH]FPU context corrupted after resume
Next by Date: Re: devfs vs udev FAQ from the other side
Previous by thread: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on write)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]