From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:08:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:08:08 -0500 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:49422 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:07:48 -0500 Message-ID: <3C95A031.6070107@mandrakesoft.com> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:07:13 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020214 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Anton Altaparmakov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: fadvise syscall? In-Reply-To: <3C945635.4050101@mandrakesoft.com> <3C945A5A.9673053F@zip.com.au> <5.1.0.14.2.20020317131910.0522b490@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk> <3C959716.6040308@mandrakesoft.com> <3C959D55.14768770@zip.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: >posix_fadvise() looks to be a fine interface: > >We'll need to cheat a bit on the offset/len thing for NORMAL and >SEQUENTIAL - just apply it to the whole file - we don't want to have to >attach an arbitrary number of silly range objects to each file for this. >(We already cheat a bit this way with msync). > yep >Given this, I don't see a persuasive need to implement a non-standard >interface. It takes an off_t, so posix_fadvise64() is also needed. > agreed WRT non-standard. Are we required to have both foo and foo64 variants? If I had my druthers, I would just do the foo64 version. > >A 2.4 implementation could be done any time. If anyone decides to >do this, please let me know... > count me down as interested after my current project... If someone else does it, more power to them... Jeff