- Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] introduce sys_syncfs to sync a single file system
- From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 22:22:44 +0100
- Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, G@xxxxxxxxx, Indan Zupancic <indan@xxxxxx>, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx>, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx>, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxx, l@xxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <20110314211119.GC8120@xxxxxxxxx>
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1103101125150.4190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110314131042.5a7fb32f.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110314211119.GC8120@xxxxxxxxx>
- User-agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.38-rc8+; KDE/4.5.1; x86_64; ; )
On Monday 14 March 2011 22:11:19 Ted Ts'o wrote:
> It wouldn't hurt to have a "flags" field which we could expand later
> --- but that can lead to portability headaches for userspace programs
> that don't know whether a particular kernel is going to support a
> particular flag or not. So it's certainly not a panacea.
I think adding an unused flags argument can't hurt.
We could be fancy and ignore half the bits but bail out on the other
half with -EINVAL. That would make it possible to add both compatible
(default being full sync on old kernels) and incompatible (getting
rejected on old kernels) flags.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Home]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Video for Linux]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Photo]
[Yosemite News]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Free Online Dating]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
[XFree86]