linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] introduce sys_syncfs to sync a single file system

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 11 Mar 2011 12:55:44 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	"Indan Zupancic" <indan@....nu>
Cc:	"Sage Weil" <sage@...dream.net>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Jonathan Nieder" <jrnieder@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, hch@....de, l@...per.es
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] introduce sys_syncfs to sync a single file system

On Friday 11 March 2011, Indan Zupancic wrote:
> >       http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&amp;m=127970513829285&amp;w=2
> 
> The patch there seems much more reasonable than introducing a whole
> new systemcall just for 20 lines of kernel code. New system calls are
> added too easily nowadays.

The only problem with adding new system calls is that we are stuck with
the interface until the end of time, so we must be sure not to get it
wrong. The same thing is true for any other interface such as ioctl
or extensions to existing system calls. People usually get away with
adding new ioctls more easily because it is less obvious when they
are added.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/