From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shirish Pargaonkar Subject: Re: O_DIRECT not working with vers=3.0 Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 18:15:36 -0600 Message-ID: References: <2368A3FCF9F7214298E53C823B0A48EC042F1727@AMSPEX01CL02.citrite.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "smfrench@gmail.com" To: Thanos Makatos Return-path: Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42]:59188 "EHLO mail-la0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750959AbbAYAPi (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Jan 2015 19:15:38 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ms9so2951673lab.1 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2015 16:15:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2368A3FCF9F7214298E53C823B0A48EC042F1727@AMSPEX01CL02.citrite.net> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: All cifs_direct_io does is return -EINVAL On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Thanos Makatos wrote: > In dca692880e887739a669f6c41a80ca68ce2b09fc I see that ".direct_IO = cifs_direct_io" is added only to "cifs_addr_ops" but not to "cifs_addr_ops_smallbuf". > Presuming that the only difference between the two structs is the size of the buffer they operate on (judging by the name), shouldn't ".direct_IO = cifs_direct_io" be added to "cifs_addr_ops_smallbuf" as well? > In a test environment an open(2) using O_DIRECT didn't work (vers=3.0) but when I added ".direct_IO = cifs_direct_io" to "cifs_addr_ops_smallbuf" it worked. > > -- > Thanos Makatos-- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html