Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 13:00:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 13:00:17 -0400 Received: from pg-fw.paradigmgeo.com ([192.117.235.33]:32858 "EHLO ntserver2.geodepth.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 13:00:15 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gregory Giguashvili To: "'Dr. Michael Weller'" Cc: "Linux Kernel (E-mail)" Subject: RE: Problem with msync system call Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:00:55 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1263 Lines: 30 Thanks a lot for your comments. >I must say I have a very uneasy feeling about such a usage and >don't know how it is covered by standards (although you claim it works for non >linux). Experience shows that such a construct is very >fragile. Note also that NFS file locking is not mandatory, only advisory (read: >user level) and it is unclear how that will interact with mmap. I agree that the construction is very fragile, but... - It's been working on a variety of OSes for years... There is no reason for Linux not to support it as a mature operating system. - This works for read/write system calls if the file is open with O_SYNC flag and NFS is mounted using "sync" option. - There has to be something in the OS that users can do to unconditionally reread mapped files (no matter if this is NFS or not) - Even mandatory locking should be sufficient for mmap interaction if one cares to flush information to the disk before the file is unlocked. Suprisingly, locking is not the problem here :) Best, Giga - 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/