Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 18 Mar 2002 00:17:21 -0800 | | From | Andrew Morton <> | | Subject | Re: fadvise syscall? |
| |
Jeff Garzik wrote: > > ... > >Given this, I don't see a persuasive need to implement a non-standard > >interface. It takes an off_t, so posix_fadvise64() is also needed. > > > agreed WRT non-standard. > > Are we required to have both foo and foo64 variants? If I had my > druthers, I would just do the foo64 version.
That would be good. I can't see a reason why
#define posix_fadvise posix_fadvise64
would not suffice. That doesn't mean there isn't one :)
- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |