On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 19:45 -0500, Steve French wrote: > Fix seems logical, although would like to see the maxbytes field the > correct size. If it really is a loff_t rather than unsigned why > wasn't sparse warning on the vfs in sendfile when it did this > incorrect cast? > *shrug* -- maybe sparse does throw a warning, I haven't checked. It's also not necessarily an incorrect cast I guess -- depends on whether it's just set too large. I think we should consider changing s_maxbytes to loff_t, but I need to have a closer look and make sure it wouldn't break anything. There are also other fs's that probably need similar fixes. > When did this start breaking, am a little surprised that connectathon > (and the usual dbench, fsstress, fsx etc.) didn't break if sendfile > was broken, and I don't think that cifs has changed in this area in a > long time. > This has been broken for a long, long time (at least a couple of years). Most of the reports that I have are people complaining that web serving using apache from CIFS shares doesn't work right. I think apache uses multiple sendfile calls per file, and bails out when it gets an error on the first call. > Shouldn't this cc stable ... sendfile is important. > No objection to -stable if everyone thinks it's important enough. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- 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
