Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: remove the never implemented aio_fsync file operation

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:23:31AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> This doesn't belong in this patchset.

It does.  I can't fix up the calling conventions for a methods that
was never implemented.

> Regardless, can we just implement the damned thing rather than
> removing it?  Plenty of people have asked for it and they still want
> this functionality. I've sent a couple of different prototypes that
> worked but got bikeshedded to death, and IIRC Ben also tried to get
> it implemented but that went nowhere because other parts of his
> patchset got bikeshedded to death.
> 
> If nothing else, just let me implement it in XFS like I did the
> first time so when all the bikshedding stops we can convert it to
> the One True AIO Interface that is decided on.

I'm not going to complain about a proper implementation, but right now
we don't have any, and I'm not even sure the method signature is
all that suitable.  E.g. for the in-kernel users we'd really want a 
ranged fsync like the normal fsync anyway.