From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MIB84-0003iE-4N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:41:52 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MIB7y-0003Y9-Pq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:41:50 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38645 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MIB7y-0003Y5-N0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:41:46 -0400
Received: from mail-yx0-f192.google.com ([209.85.210.192]:32782)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <programmingkidx@gmail.com>) id 1MIB7y-0007wx-Bn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:41:46 -0400
Received: by yxe30 with SMTP id 30so3636737yxe.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4A3D72B5.5080806@codemonkey.ws>
References: <20f282157f4df2f513fdb51427be26c7@hotpop.com>	<20090620191629.GB25835@lst.de>
	<20090620233005.GB29958@shareable.org>
	<4A3D72B5.5080806@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v624)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <99cfa4f95f7ce8cbae59b168aee645b8@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: G 3 <programmingkidx@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] replace O_SYNC with O_FSYNC
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:41:43 -0400
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org


On Jun 20, 2009, at 7:37 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> If O_FSYNC and O_SYNC do the same thing, and O_SYNC is used anywhere,
>> there's no harm in this for portability:
>>
>>     #if !defined(O_SYNC) && defined(O_FSYNC)
>>     #define O_SYNC O_FSYNC
>>     #endif
>>
>> The patch assumes O_FSYNC is defined if O_SYNC isn't, which is wrong.
>>
>
> For what this patch is, it really isn't that important IMHO.
>
> This is just a work around for a broken platform.
>

Even though you are correct, did you have to add the 'broken platform' 
remark?