Re: why does fsync() on a tmpfs directory give EINVAL?

From: Chris Friesen
Date: Thu Jun 16 2005 - 20:56:03 EST

Andrew Morton wrote:
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Currently tmpfs reuses the simple_dir_operations from libfs.c.

Would it make sense to add the empty fsync() function there, and have all other users pick it up as well? Is this likely to break stuff?
Isn't simple_sync_file() suitable?

I think it would be fine. The issue is that currently for directories tmpfs doesn't have it's own set of operations--it reuses the simple_dir_operations set of file ops from libfs.

We could make a tmpfs-specific set of operations that is identical to simple_dir_operations but with the addition of setting the fsync function to simple_sync_file().

Alternately, if it makes sense for all the users of simple_dir_operations we could modify it directly and all of the other users of simple_dir_operations would get the change for free. I don't know enough about the other filesystems to know if this makes sense or not.

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