# Re: \[PATCH v3\] introduce sys\_syncfs to sync a single file system

- From: Jonathan Nieder \<hidden\>
- Date: 2011-03-11 23:56:15 
- List: linux-api
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2011/03/51624
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-fsdevel/2011/03/51623/t.md

```text
Indan Zupancic wrote:

> If there still is a good reason to implement this, please don't add it
> as a new system call, but add it to sync_file_range(), as that seems
> the best place for odd file synchronisation operations.

I have no strong preference about how this is added (and in fact I'm
quite ignorant about the usual conventions), but:

 - as a sysadmin, it really _would_ be nice to be able to say
   "sync /usr" to sync /usr;

 - the existing functionality of sync_file_range is about controlling
   writeback behavior for files, not mounts.

So unless there is a shortage of syscall numbers or something, I find
the request to omit this or tack it onto sync_file_range odd.  Could
you explain the benefit?

Thanks,
Jonathan
```