When working on the RISC-V port I noticed that F_SETLK64 was being
defined on our 64-bit platform, despite our port being so new that
we've only ever had the 64-bit file ops. Since there's not compat
layer for these, this causes fcntl to bail out.
It turns out that one of the ways in with
When working on the RISC-V port I noticed that F_SETLK64 was being
defined on our 64-bit platform, despite our port being so new that
we've only ever had the 64-bit file ops. Since there's not compat
layer for these, this causes fcntl to bail out.
It turns out that one of the ways in with
When working on the RISC-V port I noticed that F_SETLK64 was being
defined on our 64-bit platform, despite our port being so new that
we've only ever had the 64-bit file ops. Since there's not compat
layer for these, this causes fcntl to bail out.
It turns out that one of the ways in with
When working on the RISC-V port I noticed that F_SETLK64 was being
defined on our 64-bit platform, despite our port being so new that
we've only ever had the 64-bit file ops. Since there's not compat
layer for these, this causes fcntl to bail out.
It turns out that one of the ways in with
When working on the RISC-V port I noticed that F_SETLK64 was being
defined on our 64-bit platform, despite our port being so new that
we've only ever had the 64-bit file ops. Since there's not compat
layer for these, this causes fcntl to bail out.
It turns out that one of the ways in with
When working on the RISC-V port I noticed that F_SETLK64 was being
defined on our 64-bit platform, despite our port being so new that
we've only ever had the 64-bit file ops. Since there's not compat
layer for these, this causes fcntl to bail out.
It turns out that one of the ways in with
6 matches
Mail list logo