[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E53E6F4.1040006@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 19:44:20 +0200
From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
To: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@...cle.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
Il 22/08/2011 23:22, Sunil Mushran ha scritto:
> 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?
>
Sorry, I was reading the results in a wrong way.
Marco
--
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