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:	Mon, 14 Mar 2011 02:59:00 +0100 (CET)
From:	"Indan Zupancic" <indan@....nu>
To:	"Jeff Garzik" <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	"Ric Wheeler" <ricwheeler@...il.com>,
	"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>, "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 Mon, March 14, 2011 02:45, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On 03/13/2011 09:31 PM, Indan Zupancic wrote:
>> The new syscall works on only one fd too. The behaviour of the proposed
>> syncfs and an extended sync_file_range is exactly the same.
>
> No, it's not.  You should read the patch before commenting.

Have you read my sync_file_range patch? Because it's exactly the
same code, but put in sync_file_range instead of a new system call.
How that can have different behaviour, I have no idea.


--
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/