Re: [PATCH] Centralise definitions of sector_t and blkcnt_t

[Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 01:21:43PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >CONFIG_LBD and CONFIG_LSF are spread into asm/types.h for no particularly
> >good reason.  Centralising the definition in linux/types.h means that arch
> >maintainers don't need to bother adding it, as well as fixing the problem
> >with x86-64 users being asked to make a decision that has absolutely no
> >effect.  The H8/300 porters seem particularly confused since I'm not aware
> >of any microcontrollers that need to support 2TB filesystems these days.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
> 
> Doesn't look like 2.6.19-rc1 material to me...
> 
> The only apparently "problem" has no real effect, according to you.

Huh?  It adds LBD/LSF support to a bunch of architectures that haven't
noticed that they needed to do anything.  It stops annoying X86_64 users
with a question that has no effect.  It reduces memory consumption for
the h8/300 port.

It's been submitted before.  I had thought it was in a tree that Linus
had pulled, but upon reviewing the diff, found out it was one of the
patches that got left out.  It was even in -mm for a while, but got
chucked out due to rejects.

Why are you opposed to it going in after -rc1?  This seems like the
ideal time to make this kind of change -- the mad merge rush is over and
patches which touch a lot of files and have a high probability of
causing rejects should go in at this point, IMO.  See also the
discussion around the pt_regs removal from interrupt handlers.