From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] BTRFS: Fix lseek return value for error Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:46:08 -0700 Message-ID: <20110918014608.GA16198@alboin.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1316128013-21980-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1316128013-21980-2-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <20110916154815.GA27150@infradead.org> <4E7439EB.7080100@oracle.com> <41C7FF67-8658-4E7F-BB50-E9AAEA1F755C@dilger.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "jeff.liu@oracle.com" , Christoph Hellwig , Andi Kleen , "viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" To: Andreas Dilger Return-path: In-Reply-To: <41C7FF67-8658-4E7F-BB50-E9AAEA1F755C@dilger.ca> List-ID: > > with an additional improvement if the offset is larger or equal to the > > file size, return -ENXIO in directly: > > > > if (offset >= inode->i_size) { > > mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex); > > return -ENXIO; > > } > > Except that is wrong, because it would then be impossible to write sparse files. And also i_size must be always read with i_size_read() Anyways clearly there's a problem in btrfs land with merging fixes in time. Is anyone collecting patches while Chris is gone? -Andi