On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:05:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > > > > However, there are some similar stuff: ->st_size, ->st_nlink and > > ->st_ino in stat() (cp_old_stat()). Maybe EOVERFLOW is the reason for > > consistency... > > .. I actually had an old binary that triggered that case (actually, it was > O_LARGEFILE in open()), and didn't work as a result. I only needed to run > it once, so I literally hacked up a once-time-use kernel that just removed > the EOVERFLOW in open. > > So no, I'm not a fan of EOVERFLOW at all. Not in readdir(), not really > anywhere else. Um... Here it would happen only on attempt to return an entry for file that really has an inumber not fitting into the field; what would you do in such case? open() on a huge file is a different story, since you would get a valid opened file and that'd be it; the logics in case of open() is, IIRC, "I guess your binary is old, so it'll probably do other things that would really have to trigger -EOVERFLOW; better bail out right now". In this case, though, you either generate an error or get wrong values silently stored in userland struct (wrapped around inumber). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
