Re: why does fsync() on a tmpfs directory give EINVAL?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andrew Morton wrote:
Chris Friesen <[email protected]> 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
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux