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

2007-05-03 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 11:28:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > The posix spec implies that negative `len' is permitted - presumably > > > "allocate > > > ahead of `offset'". How peculiar. > > > > I just checked the man page for posix_fallocate() and it says: > > > > EINVAL offset o

Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call

2007-04-20 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 07:21:46PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote: > Ok. > In this case we may have to consider following things: > > 1) Obviously, for this glibc will have to call fallocate() syscall with > different arguments on s390, than other archs. I think this should be > doable and should not

Re: Interface for the new fallocate() system call

2007-03-29 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:10:10AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Platform: s390 > > -- > > s390 prefers following layout: > > > >int fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int mode) > > > > For details on why and how "int, int, loff_t, loff_t" is a problem on > > s390, ple