xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: review: set blocksize patch - libxfs & mkfs

To: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: review: set blocksize patch - libxfs & mkfs
From: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:33:11 +1000
Cc: xfs-dev@xxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20061006064608.GE11034@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <778901771D2CDD34FDDE6CFA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061006064608.GE11034@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Dave,

--On 6 October 2006 4:46:08 PM +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 04:34:03PM +1000, Timothy Shimmin wrote:
Request for review of libxfs patch.
....
Index: xfsprogs/libxfs/darwin.c
===================================================================
--- xfsprogs/libxfs/darwin.c.orig       2006-10-06 14:12:27.000000000 +1000
+++ xfsprogs/libxfs/darwin.c    2006-10-06 14:14:03.000000000 +1000
@@ -51,8 +51,8 @@
        return (writable == 0);
}

-void
-platform_set_blocksize(int fd, char *path, dev_t device, int blocksize)
+int
+platform_set_blocksize(int fd, char *path, dev_t device, int blocksize,
int fatal)
{
}

Should "return fatal;" to fail specific setting of this until it is
supported on this platform.

Oops.
Yep.
(Also want a return statement for an int returning function, d'oh:)
And likewise for the others, yep - done.

Thanks muchly.

--Tim


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>