On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 07:31:46PM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > > Or do you mean that for some reason, uClibc is not providing > > posix_fadvise on all architectures, even though the kernel supports it? > > > > That seems wierd. > > The xtensa architecture has __NR_fadvise64_64 but not __NR_fadvise64. Should I > clarify this in the commit log? Is uClibc providing a posix_fadvise64()? Maybe the better fix would be to try to use posix_fadvise64 if it is exists, with posix_fadvise() and the locally defined posix_fadvise() as fallbacks. If not, why is uClibc not providing any userspace access to posix_fadvise, if the kernel suppots it, and it's insisting on providing a function delcaration for it? - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
