On 18 April 2012 14:45, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote: > On 17 April 2012 23:18, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:30 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer >> <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> include/fcntl.h | 4 +- >>> libc/sysdeps/linux/common/Makefile.in | 3 +- >>> libc/sysdeps/linux/common/bits/kernel-features.h | 8 ++ >>> libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fallocate.c | 43 ++++++++ >>> libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fallocate64.c | 39 +++++++ >>> libc/sysdeps/linux/common/stubs.c | 4 + >>> test/.gitignore | 1 + >>> test/unistd/Makefile.in | 3 + >>> test/unistd/tst-posix_fallocate.c | 121 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 9 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fallocate.c >>> create mode 100644 libc/sysdeps/linux/common/posix_fallocate64.c >>> create mode 100644 test/unistd/tst-posix_fallocate.c >>> >> >> Looks ok to me. Did you test it on a 32bit and a 64 bit arch ? > > I compiled it on x86 and x86_64 where it generated reasonably looking code. > No runtime-tests performed yet, thus Call For Testers.. > >> mips would be interesting. > > mips and e.g. ppc* variants of bitness and endianess would indeed be > interresting, yes.
Anyone? :) > > cheers, _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc