Re: [PATCH 1/5] fallocate() implementation in i86, x86_64 and powerpc

[Ulrich Drepper]

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.

--
â Ulrich Drepper â Red Hat, Inc. â 444 Castro St â Mountain View, CA â
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/