Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland.
From: Garrett Wollman (wollman_at_khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu)
Date: 10/07/03
- Previous message: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- In reply to: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- Next in thread: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- Reply: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:22:06 -0400 (EDT) To: Mark Valentine <mark@valentine.me.uk>
<<On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 23:20:06 +0000, Mark Valentine <mark@valentine.me.uk> said:
> It would be reasonable to enforce such restrictions on a raw device if
> we still had block devices around, but it doesn't seem reasonable now.
I think you've got that backwards. When we had block devices, they
would provide extra buffering to avoid I/O-size breakage. Character
devices, which are all we have now, never made any promises.
-GAWollman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- In reply to: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- Next in thread: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- Reply: Mark Valentine: "Re: Alignment of disk-I/O from userland."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
