Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:42:32 -0400 | From | Phil Auld <> | Subject | Re: why is lseek broken (>= 2.4.11) ? |
| |
Rumor has it that on Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 11:13:06PM +0200 Andries Brouwer said: > On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 01:48:47PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > What should the behaviour be? The lseek should succeed, > > Yes > > > but subsequent reads and writes return zero? > > Yes. The first read must return 0. Subsequent reads may return 0 > or return the ENXIO error. > > For read: "No data transfer shall occur past the current end-of-file. > If the starting position is at or after the end-of-file, 0 shall be > returned. If the file refers to a device special file, the result of > subsequent read() requests is implementation-defined." > > ENXIO: "the request was outside the capabilities of the device". > > For write: "If a write() requests that more bytes be written than > there is room for (for example, ... the physical end of a medium), > only as many bytes as there is room for shall be written. >
Agreed. That is what the standards say... And what userspace has come to expect.
Phil
> > Andries > - > 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/
-- Philip R. Auld, Ph.D. Technical Staff Egenera Corp. pauld@egenera.com 165 Forest St., Marlboro, MA 01752 (508)858-2600 - 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/
| |