lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] miss-sync changes on attributes (Re: [PATCH 2/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on utime))
From
Date
"Machida, Hiroyuki" <machida@sm.sony.co.jp> writes:

> OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
>> Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> writes:
>>
>>>However there's not much point in writing a brand-new function when
>>>write_inode_now() almost does the right thing. We can share the
>>>implementation within fs-writeback.c.
>> Indeed. We use the generic_osync_inode() for it?
>
> Please let me confirm.
> Using generic_osync_inode(inode, NULL, OSYNC_INODE) instaed of
> sync_inode_wodata(inode) is peferable for changes on fs/open.c,
> even it would write data. Is it correct?

No, I only thought the interface is good. I don't know why it writes
data pages even if OSYNC_INODE only.
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-12 08:23    [W:0.080 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site