Re: [PATCH 2/9] sector_t format string

[Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>]

Hi,

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Theodore Tso wrote:

> Ext4 will support a 48-bit blocknumber format for extents, but I do
> want to make ext4 suitable as a general purpose filesystem, and 32-bit
> systems will be around for I fear far longer than people might wish.
> So while I agree that we shouldn't go _too_ far out of our way to make
> things efficient on 32-bit systems, if it's not that much work to
> support a 32-bit sector_t, we ought to do it.
> 
> So how about a compromise?  We allow for a 32-bit sector_t in ext4,
> but we drop the SECTOR_FMT, and rely on %llu and typecasts in
> printk's.  Then the only other extra hair in the filesystem code will
> be a mount-time check to make sure we don't try to mount a large
> filesystem on system with a 32-bit sector_t.

Thanks, that's what I was hoping for. :)
Disallowing to mount large fs without CONFIG_LBD is not a real problem and 
then also truncation is not an issue anymore (except maybe for e2fsck).

bye, Roman

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642