(pruned cc list) Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hmm, ok so what about posix_fadvise(fd, 0, 0, POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) > instead, skimming over the kernel source seems to indicate it might > end up doing more or less the same thing but in a portable way? Probably a silly question, but what does "The specified data will not be accessed in the near future" have to do with preventing delayed allocation? Put another way: if this works now, is it likely to continue to work? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101129062458.ga5...@burratino
