Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations

But discarding data sometimes on USB unplug is even worse than discarding data
always --- users will by experimenting learn that linux doesn't discard
write-cached data and reminds them to replug the device --- and one day,
randomly, they lose their data because of some memory management condition...

And how exactly is that worse than discarding the data every time?!?!?!?

Undeterministic behaviour is worse than deterministic. You can learn the system that behaves deterministically.

If you know that unplug damages filesystem on your USB disk, you replug it, recheck filesystem and copy the important data again --- you have 0% probability of data damage. However, if damage on unplug happens only with 1/100 probability, will you still check filesystem and copy all recently created files on it? You forget it (or you wouldn't even know that damage might occur) and you have 1% probability of data damage.

Mikulas

Best regards,

	Anton

-
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] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Jeff Mahoney <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Mikulas Patocka <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Mikulas Patocka <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Jeff Mahoney <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Mikulas Patocka <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Jeff Mahoney <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Mikulas Patocka <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    • From: Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.14-rc4] Maintainers one entry removed
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.14-rc4] Maintainers one entry removed
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]