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

Ulrich Drepper
2007-05-07T13:22:21Z

Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> is what glibc does ATM. Seems we violate the case where len == 0, as
> EINVAL in that case is "shall fail". But reading the standard to imply
> negative len is ok is too much guessing, there is no word what it means
> when len is negative and
> "required storage for regular file data starting at offset and continuing for len bytes"
> doesn't make sense for negative size.

This wording has already been cleaned up. The current draft for the
next revision reads:

[EINVAL] The len argument is less than or equal to zero, or the offset
argument is less than zero, or the underlying file system does not
support this operation.

I still don't like it since len==0 shouldn't create an error (it's
inconsistent) but len<0 is already outlawed.

--
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖