Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 00:36:30 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Mark Valentine <mark@valentine.me.uk> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland. Message-ID: <26939.1065479790@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 06 Oct 2003 23:20:06 -0000." <200310062220.h96MK7PI061345@dotar.thuvia.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200310062220.h96MK7PI061345@dotar.thuvia.org>, Mark Valentine write s: >It would be reasonable to enforce such restrictions on a raw device if >we still had block devices around, but it doesn't seem reasonable now. It would be reasonable to make such a statement if you could demonstrate an actual application which must depend on this to work. The fact is that we currently do not offer any guarantee for disk-I/O even correctly reporting failure, unless your memory buffer is aligned according to driver specific requirements. And yet things still work. If I thought there would be any significant breakage (of non-shitty code), I would not be in doubt as to what the right thing to do would be :-) If shitty code breaks, I don't care. We're trying to raise the standard in and with FreeBSD, we're not trying to lower the bar to make any visual basic programmer pass. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?26939.1065479790>