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

- From: Arnd Bergmann \<arnd@arndb.de\>
- Date: 2011-03-14 21:23:29 
- List: linux-api
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2011/03/51677
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-fsdevel/2011/03/51669/t.md

```text
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
```