Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 12 Mar 2011 09:32:17 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] introduce sys_syncfs to sync a single file system |
| |
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 08:10:01PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Indan Zupancic wrote: > > > I'm not pushing for any official convention, just what seems good taste. > > In cases like this, conventions (consistency and best practices) are > very important. > > > Less code added, less bloat. Architecture independent, no need to update > > all system call tables everywhere (all archs, libc versions and strace). > > Two files changed, instead of 7 (which only hooks up x86). > > Thanks for explaining. Those do seem like good reasons to use a ioctl > instead of a new syscall.
No, make it a syscall, it's more obvious and will be documented much better.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |