On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > On (02/16/16 21:08), Wouter van Kesteren wrote: >> I submitted a patch to this list to fix a bug: >> >> "[PATCH] fs: allow no_seek_end_llseek to actually seek" >> https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=145468852318292&w=2 > > just a question, why not MAX_LFS_FILESIZE? > > and there is no SoB in the patch (no answers to the rest of your > questions). > > -ss Thanks for the reply Sergey, Andreas already gave me feedback on the patch as a reply to the post. Ive fixed the SoB: thing and resubmitted along with a couple of other tweaks in that. (https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=145565767604498&w=2) As to why i used MAX_OFFSET: the reason is that i felt it was the closest to the original intent of the code which was attempting 'biggest value to mean unbounded'. I don't actually know anything about the filesystem part of the kernel (or really anything about the kernel at all) so if someone tells me to use MAX_LFS_FILESIZE instead i'd be more than happy to change it. -Wouter van Kesteren -- 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
