Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 03 Jul 2005 01:11:17 -0000
From:      "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc:        Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sys_generic.c
Message-ID:  <20050125154439.GH5662@lum.celabo.org>
In-Reply-To: <86669.1106667584@critter.freebsd.dk>
References:  <20050125153729.GF5662@lum.celabo.org> <86669.1106667584@critter.freebsd.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 04:39:44PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <20050125153729.GF5662@lum.celabo.org>, "Jacques A. Vidrine" writes:
> >On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 12:42:26PM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:15:32AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >> >     sys/kern             sys_generic.c 
> >> >   Log:
> >> >   Previously a read of zero bytes got handled in devfs:vop_read() but I
> >> >   missed that when the vnode bypass was introduced.
> >> >   
> >> >   Deal with zero length transfers before we even get to fo_ops->fo_read().
> >> 
> >> Please back it out. Zero bytes read may affect atime, now not.
> >
> >I do not think that a zero byte read should not affect atime.
> 
> Explain to me then why open+mmap doesn't affect atime isn't a bigger problem ?

Er. (a) Sorry I missed the rest of the thread before posting--- I do
not really have anything to add at this point. (b) I put one too many
negatives in the sentence above: s/do not think/think/.   (^_^;)

Cheers,
-- 
Jacques A Vidrine / NTT/Verio
nectar@celabo.org / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050125154439.GH5662>