[lkml]   [2014]   [Dec]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] Improve documentation of FADV_DONTNEED behaviour
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Mel Gorman <> wrote:
> Partial page discard requests are ignored and the documentation on why this
> is correct behaviour sucks. A readahead patch looked like a "regression" to
> a random IO storage benchmark because posix_fadvise() was used incorrectly
> to force IO requests to go to disk. In reality, the benchmark sucked but
> it was non-obvious why. Patch 1 updates the kernel comment in case someone
> "fixes" either readahead or fadvise for inappropriate reasons. Patch 2
> updates the relevant man page on the rough off chance that application
> developers do not read kernel source comments.

It feels like that last sentence should have made LWN quote of the week :-/.

Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer;
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training:

 \ /
  Last update: 2014-12-30 22:01    [W:0.041 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site