From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pB6FHe1s233495 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 09:17:40 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 9DF0716EB760 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 07:17:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id pujCYeDdXr1n6LZS for ; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 07:17:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 10:17:38 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: xfs: validate inode numbers in file handles correctly Message-ID: <20111206151738.GC11874@infradead.org> References: <1276846374-23916-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20111123143045.GA20892@infradead.org> <20111128111947.GA26454@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: hank peng Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, Guoquan Yang On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 04:27:39PM +0800, hank peng wrote: > I haven't tested this patch, but I have a question now: although I use > inode64 option when mounting, my filesystem did not exceed 2T limit, > so, 32-bit inode would be no problem, right? In the normal configuration > 32bit inode numbers kick in at 1TB filesystem sizes. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs