From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9p and how can I know when a write is finished
From: Dave Eckhardt <davide+p9@cs.cmu.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
In-Reply-To: <1e20ebf729397d2587b84945563cf675@swtch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2729.1141253707.1@piper.nectar.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Wed,  1 Mar 2006 17:55:08 -0500
Message-ID: <2730.1141253708@piper.nectar.cs.cmu.edu>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0920562e-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Ok, another suggestion for the "9P Dubious Protocol Enhancement Committee":

> Tclunk can't fail (and close(2) doesn't return -1 on real fds).

I agree that it doesn't make sense for Tclunk to fail in the
"no, you must continue making I/O requests against this object"
sense.

But any time there's asynchrony in the system Tclunk may end
up being the last time an error related to a previous operation
can be reported.  There isn't a "Tensure-all-bits-are-stable",
right?

I believe the Linux guys used to believe that VOP_CLOSE "couldn't
return errors" and defined the operation as void, and I don't think
they still do that.

Dave Eckhardt