What problem does that change solve? It adds an additional call when
EOF is reached. The way most user apps are written, that'll mean two
calls that return Rread count 0.
I was thinking of doing a similar change, but decided against it.
Thanks,
Lucho
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Venkateswararao Jujjuri (JV)
<jvrao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A simple fix to retry on short reads.
>
> Signed-off-by: Venkateswararao Jujjuri <jvrao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/9p/vfs_file.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
> index 2695491..cae984d 100644
> --- a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
> +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
> @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ v9fs_file_readn(struct file *filp, char *data, char __user *udata, u32 count,
> offset += n;
> count -= n;
> total += n;
> - } while (count > 0 && n == size);
> + } while (count > 0);
>
> if (n < 0)
> total = n;
> --
> 1.6.5.2
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by
>
> Make an app they can't live without
> Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> V9fs-developer mailing list
> V9fs-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/v9fs-developer
>
--
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
