Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Christoph Hellwig<hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I think you are right, the constant used is incorrect. Does the small
>> patch below fix it for you?
>
> Yes, after adding this patch, xfs_fsr works.
Crud, sorry about that. I swear I ran 32-bit xfstests under a 64-bit
kernel, but I think we were lacking in fsr coverage....
-Eric
>> Index: linux-2.6/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_ioctl32.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_ioctl32.c 2009-08-31 15:25:06.093044591 -0300
>> +++ linux-2.6/fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_ioctl32.c 2009-08-31 15:25:10.856544216 -0300
>> @@ -619,7 +619,7 @@ xfs_file_compat_ioctl(
>> case XFS_IOC_GETVERSION_32:
>> cmd = _NATIVE_IOC(cmd, long);
>> return xfs_file_ioctl(filp, cmd, p);
>> - case XFS_IOC_SWAPEXT: {
>> + case XFS_IOC_SWAPEXT_32: {
>> struct xfs_swapext sxp;
>> struct compat_xfs_swapext __user *sxu = arg;
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>
--
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
