Trond Myklebust <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> There was a bug reported on the 'exim' user list a couple of months ago:
> the Linux NFS client reports -EINVAL if you try to fsync() a directory.
>
> The correct response would be to return a dummy '0' for success, since all
> NFS operations that change the directory are supposed to be performed
> synchronously on the server anyway...
> +/*
> + * All directory operations under NFS are synchronous, so fsync()
> + * is a dummy operation.
> + */
> +int nfs_fsync_dir(struct file *filp, struct dentry *dentry, int datasync)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
What if the NFS stuff is not mounted with sync or explicitly mounted
async? Will an nfsd still do synchronous writes to directories?
--
Matthias Andree
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
PC Mods, Computing goodies, cases & more
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
>>>>> " " == Matthias Andree <[email protected]> writes:
> What if the NFS stuff is not mounted with sync or explicitly
> mounted async? Will an nfsd still do synchronous writes to
> directories?
Of course. It is not possible for the NFS client to switch this
behaviour off, since it is part of the server side specifications in
the protocol.
The only thing that can screw you up is if you use the 'async' option
in /etc/exports on the server.
Cheers,
Trond
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
PC Mods, Computing goodies, cases & more
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs