Re: [PATCH 1/2] miss-sync changes on attributes (Re: [PATCH 2/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on utime))

From: OGAWA Hirofumi
Date: Wed Oct 12 2005 - 01:21:43 EST

"Machida, Hiroyuki" <machida@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
>> Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at