public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 64-bit capable block device layer
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 19:53:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010307195323.D4653@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010307184749.A4653@suse.de> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0103071504250.1409-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0103071504250.1409-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva>; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 03:12:17PM -0300

On Wed, Mar 07 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > how would you feel about having the block device layer 64-bit
> > > capable, so Linux can have block devices of more than 2GB in
> > > size ?
> >
> > I already did this here, or something similar at least. Using
> > a sector_t type that is 64-bit, regardless of platform. Is it
> > really worth it to differentiate and use 32-bit types for old
> > machines?
> 
> Wonderful !
> 
> I'm not sure how expensive 64-bit arithmetic would be on
> eg. 386, 486 or 68k machines, or how much impact the extra
> memory taken would have.
> 
> OTOH, I'm not sure what problems it could give to make this
> a compile-time option...

Plus compile time options are nasty :-). It would probably make
bigger sense to completely skip all the merging etc for low end
machines. I think they already do this for embedded kernels (ie
removing ll_rw_blk.c and elevator.c). That avoids most of the
64-bit arithmetic anyway.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2001-03-07 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-03-07 17:41 64-bit capable block device layer Rik van Riel
2001-03-07 17:47 ` Jens Axboe
2001-03-07 18:12   ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-07 18:53     ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2001-03-08  9:51       ` David Weinehall
2001-03-08 12:14       ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-08 13:18       ` Ingo Oeser

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=20010307195323.D4653@suse.de \
    --to=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
    --cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox