lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ramfs: pretend dirent sizes
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> So the size you want to reflect is n*<stack-depth> i take it? Where
> in this case n is 20?
>
> So you can seek to m*<stack-depth>+<offset> to access an offset into
> something at depth m?
>

Yes.

>>The i_size of a directory isn't covered by the POSIX standard. IMO,
>>it should be possible to seek in the range of i_size and a following
>>readdir() on the directory should succeed.
>
> With what defined semantics? What if an entry is added in between
> seek and readdir?
>

You have the same problem with regular files. This is a user and not a
kernel problem.

>
> Why? It seems perfectly reasonable that we can return 0 in such
> cases. Zero seems to make more sense as 'magical/unknown' than say
> any other arbitrary value.
>

I disagree. Where is the information value of i_size if we always could
return 0? IMO it should be at least an upper bound for the "number" of
informations that could actually be read (in terms of a seek offset)
like it is in the case of regular files. Better, if it is a strict upper
bound so that you can seek to every value smaller than i_size. For this
purpose the i_size of directories doesn't need to reflect any unit.

Jan
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-07-19 21:16    [W:0.273 / U:0.544 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site