| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20070417125514.GA7574@amitarora.in.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:25:14 +0530 From: "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com, cmm@...ibm.com, suparna@...ibm.com Subject: Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:14:17AM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Wouldn't > int fallocate(loff_t offset, loff_t len, int fd, int mode) > work on both s390 and ppc/arm? glibc will certainly wrap it and > reorder the arguments as needed, so there is no need to keep fd first. > I think more people are comfirtable with this approach. Since glibc will wrap the system call and export the "conventional" interface (with fd first) to applications, we may not worry about keeping fd first in kernel code. I am personally fine with this approach. Still, if people have major concerns, we can think of getting rid of the "mode" argument itself. Anyhow we may, in future, need to have a policy based system call (say, for providing the goal block by applications for performance reasons). "mode" can then be made part of it. Comments ? -- Regards, Amit Arora - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists