On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 09:14:04PM +0200, Jan Blunck wrote: > >So you can seek to m*<stack-depth>+<offset> to access an offset into > >something at depth m? > > > > Yes.
Hos does that work if offset >= m? > I disagree. Where is the information value of i_size if we always > could return 0? Directories clearly can't have zero size, so 0 means 'special'. Anything other than zero *might* be a real value. > IMO it should be at least an upper bound for the "number" of > informations that could actually be read (in terms of a seek offset) > like it is in the case of regular files. Why? And what should that upper bound be? > Better, if it is a strict upper bound so that you can seek to every > value smaller than i_size. For this purpose the i_size of > directories doesn't need to reflect any unit. lseek talks about bytes --- yes, it means for files specifically but I still don't see why we need to define more counter-intuitive semantics for directories when we don't need them. Also, how is lseek + readdir supposed to work in general? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
