On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:32:53AM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> >> > > Can you write a test (or set of) for fstests that exercises this new >> > > functionality? I'm not worried about performance, just >> > > correctness.... >> > >> > On the subject of testing, I added support to trinity (attached, >> > untested). That did raise one question. Do we expect applications to >> > #include <linux/fs.h> to get the RWF_NONBLOCK definition? >> >> Trinity will at least need an addition to include/compat.h for >> older headers that won't have the definition. Looks ok otherwise. > > OK, I'll add that. > >> Also, I usually sit on stuff like this until the syscall numbers are >> in Linus tree. This is 3.19 stuff I presume ? >> istr akpm picked up execveat recently, so if that goes in first, we'll >> need to respin this anyway.. > > Sure. I just wanted to test with trinity *before* it makes it into the > kernel. Crazy, I know. ;-) I am happy to help out to make sure it's solid... although deep down inside I secretly wish that now wasn't the time we decided to start doing it :) > > Cheers, > Jeff -- Milosz Tanski CTO 16 East 34th Street, 15th floor New York, NY 10016 p: 646-253-9055 e: milosz@xxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
