From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 23:24:30 +0200 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: posix_fadvise Message-ID: <20000414232430.E30555@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> References: <20000414105811.B29138@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> <20000414224552.A30555@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Ulrich Drepper on Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 01:56:54PM -0700 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: VGER kernel list , linux-mm@kvack.org, Chuck Lever List-ID: Ulrich Drepper wrote: > Jamie Lokier writes: > > > Ok. You should be aware that the present Linux implementation of > > MADV_DONTNEED is "nukes dirty data". Do you have a POSIX standard that > > says POSIX MADV_DONTNEED should be similar to POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED? > > Yes. But this shouldn't be a problem. Nobody says that nuking isn't OK. You gave the definition as "the application does not need the data in the near future". If it were ok to nuke the data, the definition would say "the application does not need the data". -- Jamie -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/