Shachar Shemesh wrote on Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 06:35:18 +0300: > On 07/29/2012 02:12 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > So if the disk hardware fails after close() returns but before the OS > > caches are flushed... > > It is not part of close(2)'s job description to protect against this > scenario. If you want to protect against this scenario, use sync(2).
No argument here. Just wanted to explicitly point out that, when you wrote "cannot fail due to X", it still could fail due to Y. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
