RE: O_SYNC option doesn't work (2.4.18-3)

From: Gregory Giguashvili (
Date: Wed Aug 07 2002 - 14:24:37 EST

>Furthermore, even with 'noac' they *all* have problems with races in
>the sort of scenario you describe because there is no atomic
>GETATTR+READ operation.
>Bottom line: If you want the sort of data cache consistency you are
>describing, you *have* to use file locking.
File locking, meaning lockd? There are so many problems with file locking in
heterogeneous environments that we were moving towards dropping its usage.
Instead, we planned to use some home grown TCP based lock server mechanism.

I understand that locking file flushes NFS cache, isn't it? Why can't it be
flushed by O_SYNC and "sync" options presence? This would make the life much
easier for programmers...

This means that we will never be able to drop lockd locking and at the same
time achieve file consistency via NFS?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 07 2002 - 22:00:36 EST