On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 01:06:27AM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > With the assumption this is not going to work, I wrote my own patch > which adds close_fd_sync() and filp_close_sync(). They are shipped as > dedicated func entry points, but perhaps inlines which internally add a > flag to to the underlying routine would be preferred? Yes, I think static inlines would be better here. > Also adding __ in > front would be in line with __fput_sync, but having __filp_close_sync > call __filp_close looks weird to me. I'd handle this as ... int file_close_sync(struct file *, fl_owner_t, bool sync); static inline filp_close(struct file *file, fl_owner_t owner) { return file_close_sync(file, owner, false); }