JFFS2 as transactional FS (in other words: how to be sure that data have been writtent correctly from userspace)

[David Woodhouse]

On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 07:44 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Wait... why?  Rejecting mount -o sync seems sane, but why can't O_SYNC
> support be handled?  If users want to open their files like that and it
> causes JFFS2 to flush a bunch of padding out, well they asked for it. 

Users ask for shared writable mmap too. That isn't a good idea either.

Contemplate what Linus always says about using 'volatile' vs. proper
barriers. Now consider it for O_SYNC vs. fsync(). And factor in the fact
that O_SYNC is going to be massively suboptimal if it causes syncs when
they otherwise didn't need to happen.

-- 
dwmw2