Maybe the issue isn’t with the word “all”, but with the word “father”. Indeed, with four instances of “all” in the same verse, there’s plenty of useful context to query. If you’ve assert that “all” in the verse doesn’t mean “all men”, you also assert that God is NOT over all men. But can God be “father” to all without being “father” to some? Yes, if “father” can have a source meaning as well as an efficacy meaning. John demonstrates both meanings earlier in the chapter.5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Jesus told the unbelieving Jews, God was not their FATHER. So when you read of ALL in the new covenant having to do in context with believers, it means ALL of THEM only, not also ALL of the unbelieving world.
John 8:37-38 (KJV) 37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed [father defined as source]; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. 38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father [father defined in terms of efficacy].
Jesus was a master of equivalence. Try using the different definitions of “father” before you restrict the scope of “all” unnecessarily.