From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751418AbWEDHPo (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 May 2006 03:15:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751419AbWEDHPo (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 May 2006 03:15:44 -0400 Received: from vulpecula.futurs.inria.fr ([195.83.212.5]:42454 "EHLO vulpecula.futurs.inria.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751418AbWEDHPn (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 May 2006 03:15:43 -0400 Message-ID: <4459AA1B.9020207@tremplin-utc.net> Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 09:15:39 +0200 From: Eric Piel User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060422) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vadim Lobanov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: limits / PIPE_BUF? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 05/04/2006 07:55 AM, Vadim Lobanov wrote/a écrit: > Hi, Hi! : > > A snippet from include/linux/limits.h: > #define PIPE_BUF 4096 /* # bytes in atomic write to a pipe */ > > PIPE_BUF is a bit of an oddity. It is defined there, then redefined in > the arm header files, even though those header files are never included > anywhere. Actually, here, on a 2.6.16 source code, PIPE_BUF is used in arch/sparc/kernel/sys_sunos.c, arch/sparc64/kernel/sys_sunos32.c, and arch/sparc64/solaris/fs.c . It seems it's some kind of compatibility value with Sun's OS... > Also, PIPE_BUF is never referenced by name in any of the Linux > code. And yet, it is still being mentioned in some Big And Scary > Warnings (tm): fs/autofs4/waitq.c or include/linux/pipe_fs_i.h, for > example. Maybe they wanted to say PIPE_BUFFERS ? (just wild guess) c u, Eric