From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261891AbTJIW06 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:26:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261956AbTJIW06 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:26:58 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:51168 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261891AbTJIW05 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:26:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 15:26:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Trond Myklebust cc: Ulrich Drepper , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: statfs() / statvfs() syscall ballsup... In-Reply-To: <16261.56894.8109.858323@charged.uio.no> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > Question: how we're supposed to reconcile the two cases for something > like NFS, where these 2 values are supposed to differ? I'd suggest going for "optimal block size everywhere". > Note that f_bsize is usually larger than f_frsize, hence conversions > from the former to the latter are subject to rounding errors... User space shouldn't know or care about frsize, and it doesn't even necessarily make any sense on a lot of filesystems, so make it easy for the user. It's not as if the rounding errors really matter. Linus