[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [net-next PATCH v5 2/3] sysctl: add proc_do_large_bitmap
Cong Wang wrote:
> Octavian Purdila wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 February 2010 07:24:00 you wrote:
>>> Octavian Purdila wrote:
>>>> Here is a new version of this patch which fixes both the comma and
>>>> invalid value issues, please give it a try.
>>> Sorry, it is even worse. :(
>>>> [net-next PATCH v5 2/3] sysctl: add proc_do_large_bitmap
>>>> The new function can be used to read/write large bitmaps via /proc. A
>>>> comma separated range format is used for compact output and input
>>>> (e.g. 1,3-4,10-10).
>>> Writing "50000-50100" gets EINVAL, it should be success.
>>> Writing "50000,50100" fails too.
>> Hmm, they don't fail for me :-/
>>> Please, at least, do some basic testing.
>> I do test them, I've attached the current test batch I was using.
>> Anyways, today I've noticed that "1,2 3" does not fail and even more
>> importantly the final value is "3".
>> Being that I don't see a way of fixing this without not acknowledging
>> 1,2 even though we will do set these values, I revisited the "1 2 3"
>> issue. And I don't understand why this is actually an issue, we are
>> just being more permissive (i.e. we are allowing as separators both
>> whitespaces and ,).
> Oops, after rechecking my test case, it is actually my test case's
> fault. Sorry for this. I will fix my test case and run it again.


Still a small problem, if I do write(fd, "50000,50100", 12) I will
get a return value of 11, which should mean 11 bytes are written,
however, actually only the first 6 bytes are accepted.

The rest looks better now.

Or am I missing something here? :)


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-02-25 04:17    [W:0.045 / U:1.144 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site