Re: [Nbd] [PATCH] nbd: Support FUA, FLUSH and ROTATIONAL
- To: Paul Clements <paul.clements@...856...>
- Cc: nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net
- Subject: Re: [Nbd] [PATCH] nbd: Support FUA, FLUSH and ROTATIONAL
- From: Wouter Verhelst <w@...112...>
- Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 23:20:49 +0200
- Message-id: <20110802212049.GD31470@...3...>
- In-reply-to: <CAECXXi4quJhSwtM4LAEQGJ_5bVCh=bp13j8-qmbOTqTvVPMyEA@...18...>
- References: <1306088301-6173-1-git-send-email-alex@...872...> <CAECXXi4quJhSwtM4LAEQGJ_5bVCh=bp13j8-qmbOTqTvVPMyEA@...18...>
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 11:58:11AM -0400, Paul Clements wrote:
> One question to the general audience: do we need an ioctl for the flag
> setting or would a sysfs entry be sufficient? I really would like to
> move away from having so many ioctls in nbd. I've started converting
> some debug and ioctl stuff to sysfs already...
Me, I don't really care either way.
I suppose the NBD_DO_IT ioctl will need to remain, since handing an fd
through a write in a totally unrelated file is going to be *very* ugly.
Other than that, I guess moving communication between client and server
to sysfs entries makes more sense.
But then, I don't generally tread in your side of the syscall :-)
--
The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by
the following formula:
pi zz a
Reply to: