Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
In many cases the use of O_DIRECT is purely to avoid impact on cache used by
other applications. An application which writes a large quantity of data will
have less impact on other applications by using O_DIRECT, assuming that the
data will not be read from cache due to application pattern or the data being
much larger than physical memory.
I see that as a good argument _not_ to allow O_DIRECT on tmpfs,
which inevitably impacts cache, even if O_DIRECT were requested.
But I'd also expect any app requesting O_DIRECT in that way, as a caring
citizen, to fall back to going without O_DIRECT when it's not supported.
I suppose that one could also argue that the backing store for tmpfs
is the memory itself and thus, O_DIRECT could or should be supported.
Thanx...
ps
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
