| To: | "Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: BLKGETSIZE64, BLKBSZSET, BLKSSZGET definition in xfsprogs. |
| From: | Jan Derfinak <ja@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 7 Oct 2003 20:12:38 +0200 (CEST) |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3F82CFFB.2000209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.53.0310060739360.16790@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20031006055957.GC1001@frodo> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0310071107220.1331@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3F82C06A.1020808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0310071542510.1331@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3F82CFFB.2000209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Jan Derfinak wrote:
>
> > But there is difference in third parameter. And this cause error in
> > _IOC_TYPECHECK macro in asm/ioctl.h.
> >
>
> And that error is caused by the header file, and will be fixed. The
> patch to fix it is already on the lkml list, but hasn't been accepted
You are right that definition of _IOC_TYPECHECK is not absolutely right. But
new definition of BLKGETSIZE64, BLKBSZSET is better that old one and
remains in new kernel.
> yet for some unknown reason. This is not xfsprogs' problem.
Is there any reason to stay with old definition and have different
definition of these macros in kernel and in xfsprogs?
Did I miss something?
jan
--
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs, James Pearson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | TAKE - switch xfs to use linux imode flags internally, Steve Lord |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: BLKGETSIZE64, BLKBSZSET, BLKSSZGET definition in xfsprogs., Kevin P. Fleming |
| Next by Thread: | Re: BLKGETSIZE64, BLKBSZSET, BLKSSZGET definition in xfsprogs., Kevin P. Fleming |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |