Re: IA64 ino_t incorrectly sized?

[David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>]

>>>>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:52:56 +1000, Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> said:

  >>  Extending ino_t to 64 bits came up last October [1].  AFAIK,
  >> nobody bothered to investigate & send a patch, so things didn't
  >> change since then.

  >> --david

  >> [1] http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0210/3952.html


  Nathan> I notice a big batch of IA64 changes has just gone into
  Nathan> 2.6-test6, but this change seems to be missing.  Is it in
  Nathan> someones queue for next time or do I need to describe the
  Nathan> problem more clearly?

  Nathan> The investigation and the patch I sent are available
  Nathan> here[2].

  Nathan> cheers.

  Nathan> -- Nathan

  Nathan> [2] http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/linux-ia64/0309/6681.html

The mail you're referring to talks about getdents64() only.  What I
didn't see is an argument why this is the _only_ user visible
interface that might be affected.  Are there any other interfaces
(syscalls, /proc/whatever, etc.) that may directly or indirectly be
affected?  If not and if the change has been run through a reasonable
test-suite (LTP?) without ill effects, I'm certainly OK with the
change.

	--david

PS: It would help to get this resolved quickly, e.g., before test8.