On Mon Nov 21 11, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2011, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > >Alexander Best <arun...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > >>here's a revised patch. > >>... > >>+.Sh CAVEATS > >>+If the > >>+.Fn lseek > >>+system call is operating on a device, which is incapable of seeking, > >>+it will request the seek operation and complete successfully. > > > >I think it would be better without the first comma (after "device"). > > Definitely. > > Also, > > +.Sh CAVEATS > +If the > +.Fn lseek > +system call is operating on a device, which is incapable of seeking, > +it will request the seek operation and complete successfully. > > I would prefer something like "request the seek operation and return as if > the seek was successful, even though no seek was performed." > > +The value of the pointer associated with such a device is undefined. > > "Which pointer?" That it is "the file offset" was clear from context > where this line was moved from, but is no longer, here. > > +Device types which can be incapable of seeking include, > +but are not limited to, tape drives. > > This is an awkward phrasing; perhaps just "Many tape drives are incapable > of seeking and can trigger this bug."?
this is too limited. this suggests that only certain tape drives won't seek after a successfull return of lseek(). as i mentioned beforehand, this is also the case with device with insertable media, such as dvd and blue-ray drives. here lseek() will sucessfully return, without a media inserted. i'll rephrase the whole patch and will submit a revised version. i think a reference to POLA, would also be a good idea, as suggested by perry@ thanks for all the suggestions. cheers. alex > > -Ben Kaduk _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
