On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 06:09:16PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote: > > Because in this case store_next_run is called, and store_next_run wraps > > around, this will succeed. > > That should not happen. It should not be wrapping around at all for most > stores. I suspect that what's needed is an end-of-store check in > store_next_run, or perhaps better yet in store_read/store_write. This is > another case where the code was written to assume no calls off the end of > the store. For store_write, it should just have a check for trying to > write past the end of the store and return EINVAL or EIO or something at > the start.
The interface seems to me to be intended to support partial writes (actual amount written returned in AMOUNT). Shouldn't it truncate? > For store_read, it should cap the the addr+amount to the store > size when it's known. Yes, I am following you. > > Now, store_read returns 256kb, and that wretches things in zread badly. > > Even with store_read fixed, it looks to me that zread has a bug. I will fix it along with the other. Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
