Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] introduce sys_syncfs to sync a single file system | Date | Mon, 14 Mar 2011 22:22:44 +0100 |
| |
On Monday 14 March 2011 22:11:19 Ted Ts'o wrote: > It wouldn't hurt to have a "flags" field which we could expand later > --- but that can lead to portability headaches for userspace programs > that don't know whether a particular kernel is going to support a > particular flag or not. So it's certainly not a panacea.
I think adding an unused flags argument can't hurt.
We could be fancy and ignore half the bits but bail out on the other half with -EINVAL. That would make it possible to add both compatible (default being full sync on old kernels) and incompatible (getting rejected on old kernels) flags.
Arnd
| |