Re: [PATCH 7/7] check for O_NONBLOCK in all read_iter instances

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 03:27:41PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig <milosz@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> Hrm, you're not Christoph...
> 
> > Acked-by: Milosz Tanski <milosz@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  fs/ceph/file.c    |    2 ++
> >  fs/cifs/file.c    |    6 ++++++
> >  fs/nfs/file.c     |    5 ++++-
> >  fs/ocfs2/file.c   |    6 ++++++
> >  fs/pipe.c         |    3 ++-
> >  fs/read_write.c   |   17 +++++++++++------
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_file.c |    4 ++++
> >  mm/shmem.c        |    4 ++++
> >  8 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c
> > index 4776257..b62e3a5 100644
> > --- a/fs/ceph/file.c
> > +++ b/fs/ceph/file.c
> > @@ -808,6 +808,8 @@ again:
> >  	if ((got & (CEPH_CAP_FILE_CACHE|CEPH_CAP_FILE_LAZYIO)) == 0 ||
> >  	    (iocb->ki_filp->f_flags & O_DIRECT) ||
> >  	    (fi->flags & CEPH_F_SYNC)) {
> > +		if (flags & O_NONBLOCK)
> > +			return -EAGAIN;
> 
> Again, the right return value for the O_DIRECT case is EINVAL.

Is it?  We define -EAGAIN as it would block, which is defintively true
for O_DIRECT reads.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/