Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 07 May 2007 06:08:43 -0700 | From | Ulrich Drepper <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] fallocate() implementation in i86, x86_64 and powerpc |
| |
Jakub Jelinek wrote: > is what glibc does ATM. Seems we violate the case where len == 0, as > EINVAL in that case is "shall fail". But reading the standard to imply > negative len is ok is too much guessing, there is no word what it means > when len is negative and > "required storage for regular file data starting at offset and continuing for len bytes" > doesn't make sense for negative size.
This wording has already been cleaned up. The current draft for the next revision reads:
[EINVAL] The len argument is less than or equal to zero, or the offset argument is less than zero, or the underlying file system does not support this operation.
I still don't like it since len==0 shouldn't create an error (it's inconsistent) but len<0 is already outlawed.
-- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖ - 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/
| |