Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 1 Mar 2007 14:25:37 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| |
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 00:04:45 +0530 "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> This is to give a heads up on few patches that we will be soon coming up > with. These patches implement a new system call sys_fallocate() and a > new inode operation "fallocate", for persistent preallocation. The new > system call, as Andrew suggested, will look like: > > asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len);
It is intended that glibc use this same syscall for both posix_fallocate() and posix_fallocate64().
I'd agree with Eric on the "command" flag extension.
That new argument might need to come after "fd" - ARM has funny requirements on syscall arg padding and layout.
> +asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len) > +{ > + struct file *file; > + struct inode *inode; > + long ret = -EINVAL; > + file = fget(fd); > + if (!file) > + goto out; > + inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode; > + if (inode->i_op && inode->i_op->fallocate) > + ret = inode->i_op->fallocate(inode, offset, len); > + else > + ret = -ENOTTY; > + fput(file); > +out: > + return ret; > +}
Please always put a blank line between the variable definitions and the first statement.
Please always use hard tabs, not bunch-of-spaces. This seems to happening rather a lot in the ext4 patches. It's a trivial thing, but also trivial to fix. A grep across the diffs is needed.
ENOTTY is a bit unconventional - we often use EINVAL for this sort of thing. But EINVAL has other meanings for posix_fallocate() and isn't really appropriate here anyway. So I'm not sure what would be better...
- 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/
| |