linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] aio: implement IOCB_CMD_FSYNC and IOCB_CMD

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]

Message-ID: <20180321093049.GA7285@lst.de>
Date:   Wed, 21 Mar 2018 10:30:49 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        Avi Kivity <avi@...lladb.com>, linux-aio@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] aio: implement IOCB_CMD_FSYNC and IOCB_CMD_FDSYNC

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 10:27:13AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> I hate the "bool" arguments to functions as you always need to go back
> and look them up.  A "wrapper" of "aio_fsync_datasync()" and
> "aio_fsync_nodatasync()" around this maybe?

This is how the fsync API works.  Wrappers really don't help anything,
although flags would certainly be nicer.  Next time I need to touch
->fsync for one reason or another that is high on the todo list.