Re: [PATCH 1/5][TAKE3] fallocate() implementation on i86, x86_64 and powerpc

["Amit K. Arora" <aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 05:42:46PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 01:33 +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
> > This patch implements sys_fallocate() and adds support on i386, x86_64
> > and powerpc platforms.
> 
> > @@ -1137,6 +1148,8 @@ struct inode_operations {
> >  	ssize_t (*listxattr) (struct dentry *, char *, size_t);
> >  	int (*removexattr) (struct dentry *, const char *);
> >  	void (*truncate_range)(struct inode *, loff_t, loff_t);
> > +	long (*fallocate)(struct inode *inode, int mode, loff_t offset,
> > +			  loff_t len);
> >  };
> 
> Does the return value from fallocate inode operation has to be *long*?
> It's not consistent with the ext4_fallocate() define in patch 4/5, 

I think ->fallocate() should return a "long", since sys_fallocate() has
to return what ->fallocate() returns and hence their return type should
ideally match.
 
> +int ext4_fallocate(struct inode *inode, int mode, loff_t offset, loff_t
> len)

I will change the ext4_fallocate() to return a "long" (in patch 4/5)
in the next post.

Agree ?

Thanks!
--
Regards,
Amit Arora

> 
> thus cause compile warnings.
> 
> 
> 
> Mingming
-
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/