linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:22:24 -0700
From:	Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@...cle.com>
To:	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
CC:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	xfs@....sgi.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA flags

On 08/22/2011 10:56 AM, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> Il 22/08/2011 17:57, Sunil Mushran ha scritto:
>>
>> The following test was used to test the early implementations.
>> http://oss.oracle.com/~smushran/seek_data/
>>
>
> Thank you very much!! I found another point. Your test fails with my 
> implementation because here 
> (http://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=415) says: "If whence is 
> SEEK_DATA, the file offset shall be set to the smallest location of a 
> byte not within a hole and not less than offset. It shall be an error 
> if no such byte exists." So in this case I return ENXIO but the test 
> expects another value. I have to say that there is a bit of confusion 
> about the real behavior of this new feature :)
>

That's test 5.10, 5.12, 5.14. And it expects -ENXIO.

Which test is failing for you?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/