Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 09:04:34 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: f_offset Message-ID: <20080413160434.GD95731@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <1309.1208100178@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20080412221654.S959@desktop> <1309.1208100178@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> [080413 08:23] wrote: > In message <20080412221654.S959@desktop>, Jeff Roberson writes: > > >> The non p-prefix versions should always be serialized, because there > >> is know way of knowing where they read/write if you don't. > > > >Well that's at odds with what the standard says and what others implement. > >I think there is a clear case for serializing writes. I don't see what > >advantage we get from serializing reads. The heavy cost of > >synchronization should be justified by actual need. > > If you don't serialize read(2) and readv(2), how do you know where > they read from ? You don't always care, if the file is a fixed record file or datagram socket then it does not matter. -- - Alfred Perlstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080413160434.GD95731>