Andreas Dilger wrote:
The kernel doesn't necessarily have to clear the fields. The per-field
valid flag would determine is that field had valid data or garbage.
You cannot leak kernel memory content. Either you clear the field or,
in the code which actually copies the data to userlevel, you
On Dec 15, 2006 14:37 -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Andreas Dilger wrote:
> >IMHO, once part of the information is optional, why bother making ANY
> >of it required? Consider "ls -s" on a distributed filesystem that has
> >UID+GID mapping. It doesn't actually NEED to return the UID+GID to ls
>
> On Friday 15 December 2006 19:20, Bryan Henderson wrote:
> > >The idea behind the cloneset is that most of the blocks (or files)
> > >do not change in either source or target. This being the case its only
> > necessary
> > >to update the changed elements. This means updates are incremental. Onc
> I am looking at filling the net-pipe, and it only reaches 40-75% max, with
> some short 100% bursts, and a slow 10% start. It seems that caching
> somewhat delays the writes, which then batch up and sync at various speeds.
> So you have the cache really hiding slow sync speeds. To tune this, it
On Friday 15 December 2006 19:20, Bryan Henderson wrote:
> >The idea behind the cloneset is that most of the blocks (or files)
> >do not change in either source or target. This being the case its only
> necessary
> >to update the changed elements. This means updates are incremental. Once
> >the
