On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 11:34:27PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > Hi Tycho, > > On 7/28/21 8:16 PM, Tycho Andersen wrote: > > I didn't know about this syscall until just now somehow, but it seems > > reasonable to mention it in the fsync. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza> > > --- > > man2/fsync.2 | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/man2/fsync.2 b/man2/fsync.2 > > index 0f070ed2c..32238dc07 100644 > > --- a/man2/fsync.2 > > +++ b/man2/fsync.2 > > @@ -200,6 +200,7 @@ to guarantee safe operation. > > .BR pwritev (2), > > .BR sync (2), > > .BR sync_file_range (2), > > +.BR syncfs (2), > > .BR fflush (3), > > .BR fileno (3), > > .BR hdparm (8), > > > > base-commit: fbe71b1b79e72be3b9afc44b5d479e7fd84b598a > > I'm hesitant about this. syncfs(2) is documented in the sync(2) > page, which is already in SEE ALSO. Knowing that, do you still > think this patch has benefit? Yes, it's one less indirection. I've opened the sync man page many times and somehow never noticed it there :). Feel free to drop the patch, though. I don't feel particularly strongly about it. Tycho
