From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89C91346AFB for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2026 14:48:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=18.9.28.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776264540; cv=none; b=UynO2AjPQkixQlZe68+buxLWczC4t44rlTDisq/yQZHjgyWH6llnPYIL+FnWL29W6BaFcFt4rSN2EV7thMdg3bqhYNKXDG79Yvru8QhvF93b/AIbmWWd3AXpSX75ONqLven2IMUYKYaE9r/H0jgmEQlwL2NU9NP0LpgghTaB8jA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776264540; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TZ2rjMDvbYb0Wwm5w+OOA0I+5751rFJbPJIRxMLyqLk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sdCJooqFXeCNTxTmold+6dKA6i6HuyTBP39bXy/sspCxAKhX9VJuL4SGFm0kXmaOwAA9uILyUp1yA++JzxZEa9wGtarDpH4MzD5oXn2NAxIvjisFgfgML189mndV1oTjqEvmgiqWO3A1NsGGSNNWmwP+OXOOxRu9VzWzblPWALY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mit.edu; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mit.edu header.i=@mit.edu header.b=G2nVIilv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=18.9.28.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mit.edu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mit.edu header.i=@mit.edu header.b="G2nVIilv" Received: from macsyma.thunk.org (pool-173-48-114-3.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [173.48.114.3]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 63FEmNYA014717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 15 Apr 2026 10:48:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mit.edu; s=outgoing; t=1776264506; bh=nQ9glAGkVLTsHcEX6jYMIwYpN+dE9n1KzADOVYBlM3M=; h=Date:From:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=G2nVIilv8Iol8KbQOdellaDmC/Jej42z8Kb42pHV3smGimTOn3EB++isjiGYAOlRB kTSF2Z7yTmmVIh3nV2wI+dyBrErhQjhcXljgpH32lnv4vislr9r3xRTqS72994AJ6/ fmhamq6xA91V1JfFtQgny4WRfaVfOlgPCj0DgpHQ2n51Qu1ALXNay4LtU7FnOQOLyf YiiG77iyVi1RsPX+eYvkX2D+oUJ29wjg0n4SAuK5bgW1H93lFi8bksxsTDsPc61Z3l EE3r2wznCBMZbye46qjc893WV+L9qUyS+nR7yot2CoQp8rFw3ETt3yG5DwMrnXlnh8 XIpfwLyELc+oA== Received: by macsyma.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id CCEBE631AF6B; Wed, 15 Apr 2026 10:47:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 10:47:22 -0400 From: "Theodore Tso" To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz Cc: Jeff Layton , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner , Christoph Hellwig , Jan Kara , Al Viro , linux-m68k , linux-sh Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Should we make inode->i_ino a u64? Message-ID: <20260415144722.GB74178@macsyma-wired.lan> References: <08f8444c7237566ffb4ba8c9eb0ab4b4a5f14440.camel@kernel.org> <1b340c4e635dcab3bed8c52d6381b4c341c0741a.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1b340c4e635dcab3bed8c52d6381b4c341c0741a.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 11:11:32AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > So, this went just over Phoronix [1] and as someone who is still invested > in 32-bit architectures, I'm only notified about the performance impact on > these systems now as the pull request has already been sent to Linus. > > I'm frustrated by this poor communication style. If your change > affects certain users negatively, it should be openly communicated > to them on the appropriate mailing lists so that they at least get > to raise concerns. Disclosing these news to a limited set of mailing > lists only is not okay. Adrian, I note that you are a Debian Maintainer. Like Debian, the Linux kernel development community is very much a do-ocracy --- only more so. If the 32-bit community really cares about Linux support, they need to be providing volunteer labor to kernel development, instead of demanding that everyone else pay the overhead tax of supporting 32-bit platforms which are rapidly disappearing. I will note that Debian itself has made the decision to stop supporting the Debian Installer for i386 and the 32-bit armel platform in Debian Trixie. Best regards, - Ted