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

Suparna Bhattacharya
2007-05-09T10:52:33Z

On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:41:50PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Andrew Morton writes:
>
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:33:32 +0530 "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This patch implements the fallocate() system call and adds support for
> > > i386, x86_64 and powerpc.
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > +asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, int mode, loff_t offset, loff_t len)
> >
> > Please add a comment over this function which specifies its behaviour.
> > Really it should be enough material from which a full manpage can be
> > written.
>
> This looks like it will have the same problem on s390 as
> sys_sync_file_range. Maybe the prototype should be:
>
> asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(loff_t offset, loff_t len, int fd, int mode)

Yes, but the trouble is that there was a contrary viewpoint preferring that fd
first be maintained as a convention like other syscalls (see the following
posts)

http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=117585330016809&w=2 (Andreas)
http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=117690157917378&w=2 (Andreas)

http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=117578821827323&w=2 (Randy)

So we are kind of deadlocked, aren't we ?

The debates on the proposed solution for s390

http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=117760995610639&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=117708124913098&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=117767607229807&w=2

Are there any better ideas ?

Regards
Suparna

>
> Paul.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
Suparna Bhattacharya (suparna@in.ibm.com)
Linux Technology Center
IBM Software Lab, India