From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:53597 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966447AbcKAOZg (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Nov 2016 10:25:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 15:25:34 +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: <20161101142534.GC17142@lst.de> References: <1477845724-27586-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1477845724-27586-3-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20161030232331.GJ22126@dastard> <20161031130754.GA9853@lst.de> <20161031202521.GN22126@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161031202521.GN22126@dastard> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 07:25:21AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > That sounds like a problem with your fix - it should work > regardless of whether a valid/implemented AIO function is called > or not, right? There's no difference between an invalid command, > IOCB_CMD_FSYNC where ->aio_fsync() is null, or some supported > command that immediately returns -EIO, the end result should > be the same... We would need the same increased file refcount if aio_fsync actually was implemented using -EIOCBQUEUED returns. We wouldn't nessecarily need it without that. > > 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. > > You mean like this version I posted a year ago: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/29/517 I'd love to see that one in - but it doesn't use the aio_fsync method either..