[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1300134595.2332.17.camel@koala>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 22:29:55 +0200
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Indan Zupancic <indan@....nu>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...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>,
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, 2011-03-14 at 13:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> There might one day be a requirement to be able to initiate a
> resource-management-style writeback against a whole filesystem. When
> that happens, we'll regret not having added a "mode" argument to
> sys_syncfs().
I think Indan is right about an additional argument which could be used
for future extensions, what is the problem adding it?
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists