Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 11:56:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: read/write atomic? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9910081139370.8080-100000@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I just spent a bit of time talking to the Linux Alan Cox and I was suprised to find out that it seems that Linux doesn't garantee read/write atomicity. It sounded somewhat strange however, it dawned on me that one should be using advisory locks instead of depending on that feature. Removing those locks would simplify a lot of the locking code, and probably aid in performance quite a bit. I know Matt Dillon wanted to implement byterange I/O locks to handle this, but it seems unnessesary in terms of complexity and performance gains. I know some people will be eager to just spout "Linux is broken" but what i'm really looking for is a situation where this would cause problems. Can anyone comment on this or reference a thread that has gone over this issue? thanks, -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@rush.net|alfred@freebsd.org] Wintelcom systems administrator and programmer - http://www.wintelcom.net/ [bright@wintelcom.net] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9910081139370.8080-100000>