Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 17 Nov 2001 14:03:01 -0500 (EST) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][RFC] Re: 2.4.15-pre5: /proc/cpuinfo broken |
| |
On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Alexander Viro wrote: > > > > Frankly, I'd prefer to try (b) before reverting to (a). Patch doing that > > variant follows. Linus, your opinion? > > (d) make seq_file have my originally suggested "subposition" code. > > Ie make the X low bits of "pos" be the position in the record, with the > high bits of "pos" being the current "record index" kind of thing. > > That makes lseek() happy.
It will not help. lseek() in question is relative and crosses the record boundary. I.e. we have
n = read(fd, buf, ...); /* process k bytes */ lseek(fd, k-n, SEEK_CUR);
and that will break just as the current variant does. It's not about seek to remembered position - it's a relative seek to calculated offset. Calculated from number of bytes returned by read().
- 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/
|  |