On 13/03/2018 17:18, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 13/03/18 00:49, Chris Johns wrote: >> Set the inode size to 256 to work around a newlib scandir check where a >> directory has to have a non-zero size to work. Set the size to greater than >> 24 bytes, a small dirent size so the allocator in scandir works. >> >> The newlib scandir code should be updated to a more recent scandir from >> FreeBSD where these checks have been removed. This change is a work >> around to avoid new tools on the release branch. >> >> With this change scandir works on IMFS, RFS and JFFS2. > > I cannot find a scandir() test in the fstests for all file systems. > >> >> Closes #3332 >> --- >> cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/fs-rtems.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/fs-rtems.c >> b/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/fs-rtems.c >> index ce84d44470..790929d856 100644 >> --- a/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/fs-rtems.c >> +++ b/cpukit/libfs/src/jffs2/src/fs-rtems.c >> @@ -1512,6 +1512,9 @@ static int jffs2_read_inode (struct _inode *inode) >> inode->i_mtime = je32_to_cpu(latest_node.mtime); >> inode->i_ctime = je32_to_cpu(latest_node.ctime); >> + if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode)) >> + inode->i_size = 256; >> + >> inode->i_nlink = f->inocache->pino_nlink; >> mutex_unlock(&f->sem); >> > > This code is from the original JFFS2 support for eCos. Which side-effects has > this i_size change for directories? Why can't you place this hack in > rtems_jffs2_fstat()? This would reduce the impact area of this change. >
I did not know the history of the RTEMS wrapper. I just assumed all code in that file is specific to RTEMS. The change I have makes things consistent. I still think it is OK? Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
