From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:46580 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S942528AbcJaNH6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:07:58 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 14:07:54 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , Al Viro , Jan Kara , Dmitry Monakhov , Jeff Moyer , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: remove the never implemented aio_fsync file operation Message-ID: <20161031130754.GA9853@lst.de> References: <1477845724-27586-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1477845724-27586-3-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20161030232331.GJ22126@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161030232331.GJ22126@dastard> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:23:31AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > This doesn't belong in this patchset. It does. I can't fix up the calling conventions for a methods that was never implemented. > Regardless, can we just implement the damned thing rather than > removing it? Plenty of people have asked for it and they still want > this functionality. I've sent a couple of different prototypes that > worked but got bikeshedded to death, and IIRC Ben also tried to get > it implemented but that went nowhere because other parts of his > patchset got bikeshedded to death. > > If nothing else, just let me implement it in XFS like I did the > first time so when all the bikshedding stops we can convert it to > the One True AIO Interface that is decided on. I'm not going to complain about a proper implementation, but right now we don't have any, and I'm not even sure the method signature is all that suitable. E.g. for the in-kernel users we'd really want a ranged fsync like the normal fsync anyway.