From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@turbolinux.com>, LA Walsh <law@sgi.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 64-bit block sizes on 32-bit systems
Date: 26 Mar 2001 11:37:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m17l1cz88v.fsf@frodo.biederman.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010326181803.F31126@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <200103261747.f2QHlEX19564@webber.adilger.int> <20010326190945.I31126@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: Matthew Wilcox's message of "Mon, 26 Mar 2001 19:09:45 +0100"
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:47:13AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > What do you mean by problems 5 years down the road? The real issue is that
> > this 32-bit block count limit affects composite devices like MD RAID and
> > LVM today, not just individual disks. There have been several postings
> > I have seen with people having a problem _today_ with a 2TB limit on
> > devices.
>
> people who can afford 2TB of disc can afford to buy a 64-bit processor.
Currently that doesn't solve the problem as block_nr is held in an int.
And as gcc compiles an int to a 32bit number on a 64bit processor, the
problem still isn't solved.
That at least we need to address.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-26 18:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-26 16:39 64-bit block sizes on 32-bit systems LA Walsh
2001-03-26 17:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2001-03-26 17:47 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-03-26 18:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2001-03-26 18:37 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2001-03-26 19:36 ` Martin Dalecki
2001-03-26 23:03 ` AJ Lewis
2001-03-26 19:05 ` Scott Laird
2001-03-26 19:09 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-03-26 20:31 ` Dan Hollis
2001-03-26 19:20 ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-26 20:14 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-03-26 17:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-03-28 8:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-03-26 17:35 LA Walsh
2001-03-26 18:01 Manfred Spraul
2001-03-26 18:07 ` Matthew Wilcox
2001-03-26 19:40 ` LA Walsh
2001-03-26 21:53 ` Manfred Spraul
2001-03-26 22:07 ` LA Walsh
2001-03-26 19:26 Jesse Pollard
2001-03-26 21:27 Jesse Pollard
2001-03-26 22:07 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-03-27 4:14 ` Jesse Pollard
2001-03-27 17:22 LA Walsh
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.30.0103270022500.21075-100000@age.cs.columbia.edu>
[not found] ` <3AC0CA9C.3D804361@sgi.com>
2001-03-27 19:00 ` Jan Harkes
2001-03-27 19:30 Jesse Pollard
2001-03-27 19:57 Jesse Pollard
2001-03-27 20:20 ` Jan Harkes
2001-03-27 21:55 ` LA Walsh
2001-03-27 22:23 Jesse Pollard
2001-03-27 23:56 ` Steve Lord
2001-03-28 8:09 ` Brad Boyer
2001-03-28 14:53 ` Dave Kleikamp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m17l1cz88v.fsf@frodo.biederman.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=adilger@turbolinux.com \
--cc=law@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.