On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 02:04:50 +0200
Maxim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Yes, you are right, you have different problem that I had
>
> But why do you need llseek ?
I dont personnaly, but tools do need llseek.
>
> Why not to mmap it ?
> It is natural thing to do with
On Thursday 22 March 2007 01:53:10 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I stand corrected : This is a new bug
>
> The /proc/kcore problem appears with linux-2.6.21-rc4-mm1
>
> fd = open("/proc/kcore", 0);
> llseek(fd, ...) returns an -EINVAL error
>
>
> Quick code inspection (before going to sleep...) shows t
I stand corrected : This is a new bug
The /proc/kcore problem appears with linux-2.6.21-rc4-mm1
fd = open("/proc/kcore", 0);
llseek(fd, ...) returns an -EINVAL error
Quick code inspection (before going to sleep...) shows that
proc_reg_llseek() (file fs/proc/inode.c)
is doing something like :
On Thursday 22 March 2007 01:11:57 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Mar 21 2007 23:58, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > On i386 , 2.6.20 / 2.6.21-rc4 :
> >
> > # gdb vmlinux /proc/kcore
> > error
> > # file /proc/kcore
> > error
>
> 00:11 ichi:/hld # file /proc/kcore
> /proc/kcore: ELF 32-bit L
On Mar 21 2007 23:58, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Hi all
>
> On i386 , 2.6.20 / 2.6.21-rc4 :
>
> # gdb vmlinux /proc/kcore
> error
> # file /proc/kcore
> error
00:11 ichi:/hld # file /proc/kcore
/proc/kcore: ELF 32-bit LSB core file Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV),
SVR4-style, from 'vmlinux'
00:11 ichi:/
Hi all
On i386 , 2.6.20 / 2.6.21-rc4 :
# gdb vmlinux /proc/kcore
error
# file /proc/kcore
error
Apparently we can not llseek() anymore on this file (returns -EINVAL)
On x86_64 2.6.20 it's working
# file /proc/kcore
/proc/kcore: ELF 64-bit LSB core file x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), SVR4-style
6 matches
Mail list logo
