From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261892AbVFQBxU (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:53:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261894AbVFQBxT (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:53:19 -0400 Received: from zcars04e.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.56]:51090 "EHLO zcars04e.ca.nortel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261892AbVFQBwx (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:52:53 -0400 Message-ID: <42B22CD3.9080600@nortel.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 19:52:19 -0600 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: Chris Friesen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040115 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: why does fsync() on a tmpfs directory give EINVAL? References: <42B1DBF1.4020904@nortel.com> <20050616135708.4876c379.akpm@osdl.org> <42B20317.6000204@nortel.com> <20050616162933.25dee57b.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20050616162933.25dee57b.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > Chris Friesen wrote: >>Currently tmpfs reuses the simple_dir_operations from libfs.c. >> >>Would it make sense to add the empty fsync() function there, and have >>all other users pick it up as well? Is this likely to break stuff? > > Isn't simple_sync_file() suitable? I think it would be fine. The issue is that currently for directories tmpfs doesn't have it's own set of operations--it reuses the simple_dir_operations set of file ops from libfs. We could make a tmpfs-specific set of operations that is identical to simple_dir_operations but with the addition of setting the fsync function to simple_sync_file(). Alternately, if it makes sense for all the users of simple_dir_operations we could modify it directly and all of the other users of simple_dir_operations would get the change for free. I don't know enough about the other filesystems to know if this makes sense or not. Chris