On Tue, 9 May 2000, Benhanokh Gabriel wrote:
> > More to the point: why do you want to bypass the security system?
> because in my case i would be paying too much, for the an overkill.
> normal appliactions don't care about this zero stuff, since they gonna be
> overwriting it with their own data which needed to be writen to the disk.
> so it is only extra memory copy, but in my case the data should never be
> writen to the disk, so i'm paying with disk access not in memory.
Hang on - first you allocate the block, then you write to it, correct? In
this case, hopefully all you are doing is writing to a block of memory,
which is then written to disk. There's a risk all your new interface
achieves is allocating a block of memory full of zeros, freeing it again,
allocating another block of zeros, writing into it and flushing to disk;
the current behaviour being allocate zeroed block, write to it, flush it.
You don't gain anything that way.
> > XFS has been released. It's not in the mainstream kernels yet, but it's
> > out there.
> is it final or beta release ?
The code itself should be very thoroughly tested, since SGI have been
using XFS in Irix for a while now. The testing and development will be
related to integrating it into Linux. In effect, well tested code, but
with a less well tested interface to the kernel. There isn't really a
"final" release or "beta" release, generally - it'll just be more and more
thoroughly tested, until it gets put into the standard kernel. You'd have
to ask the developers to find out how close that is.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 15 2000 - 21:00:12 EST