Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Oct 2003 16:24:54 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: statfs() / statvfs() syscall ballsup... |
| |
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > It would be nice if we could know in advance if we are returning values > for sys_statfs() or sys_statfs64() (e.g. by sys_statfs64() calling an > optional sb->s_op->statfs64() method if available) so we didn't have to > do this munging. We can't just assume 64-bit results, or callers of > sys_statfs() will get EOVERFLOW instead of slightly innacurate results.
This is something that sys_statfs() could do on its own. It's probably always better to try to scale the block size up than to return EOVERFLOW.
(Some things can't be scaled up, of course, like f_ffree etc. But it should be trivial to just do a "try to shift to make it fit" in the vfs_statfs_native() function in fs/open.c).
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |