Re: [PATCH] ramfs: pretend dirent sizes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Chris Wedgwood wrote:

Why bother at all?

I don't see why zero sizes are a problem.  We've had them for year
without complaints.

I'm using the i_size of directories in my patches. When reading from a union directory, I'm using the i_size to seek to the right offset in the union stack. Therefore I need values of dirent->d_off which are smaller than the i_size of the directory. Altogether, it doesn't make sense to me to seek to an offset which is greater than the i_size and let the dirent read succeed.

Jan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]
  Powered by Linux