PATCH: smbfs and >2Gb files

PATCH: smbfs and >2Gb files

[Philippe De Muyter]

Hello,

One of my workmates created a >2Gb file on a MS-Windows server. That works
perfectly.  He exported the partition and looked at it from another
MS-Windows machine, where he can see the right size.  But when we look
at the file from a linux machine, the reported size is plain wrong (it
is actually the real size on 32-bit, extended to 64 bit as a signed 32 bit
value, thus prefixed with 0xffffffff, and then printed as an unsigned 64 bit
value.).  Not only does `ls -l' not work, but other accesses to the file are
also impossible.

Here is a fix (tested on 2.2.16 and 2.4.18) :

--- include/linux/smb.hbk	Fri May 31 16:43:54 2002
+++ include/linux/smb.h	Fri May 31 17:55:49 2002
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@
 	uid_t		f_uid;
 	gid_t		f_gid;
 	kdev_t		f_rdev;
-	off_t		f_size;
+	size_t		f_size;
 	time_t		f_atime;
 	time_t		f_mtime;
 	time_t		f_ctime;

Is it possible to incorporate that in the official linux kernel tree ?

Thanks in advance

Philippe De Muyter  phdm@macqel.be  Tel +32 27029044
Macq Electronique SA  rue de l'Aeronef 2  B-1140 Bruxelles  Fax +32 27029077

Re: PATCH: smbfs and >2Gb files

[Thunder from the hill]

Hi,

On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Philippe De Muyter wrote:
> Is it possible to incorporate that in the official linux kernel tree ?

It's at least incorporated into 2.5.20-ct1, if I dare?

Regards,
Thunder
-- 
ship is leaving right on time	|	Thunder from the hill at ngforever
empty harbour, wave goodbye	|
evacuation of the isle		|	free inhabitant not directly
caveman's paintings drowning	|	belonging anywhere

Re: PATCH: smbfs and >2Gb files

[Mike Fedyk]

On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 03:18:51PM +0200, Philippe De Muyter wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> One of my workmates created a >2Gb file on a MS-Windows server. That works
> perfectly.  He exported the partition and looked at it from another
> MS-Windows machine, where he can see the right size.  But when we look
> at the file from a linux machine, the reported size is plain wrong (it
> is actually the real size on 32-bit, extended to 64 bit as a signed 32 bit
> value, thus prefixed with 0xffffffff, and then printed as an unsigned 64 bit
> value.).  Not only does `ls -l' not work, but other accesses to the file are
> also impossible.
> 
> Here is a fix (tested on 2.2.16 and 2.4.18) :
> 
> --- include/linux/smb.hbk	Fri May 31 16:43:54 2002
> +++ include/linux/smb.h	Fri May 31 17:55:49 2002
> @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@
>  	uid_t		f_uid;
>  	gid_t		f_gid;
>  	kdev_t		f_rdev;
> -	off_t		f_size;
> +	size_t		f_size;
>  	time_t		f_atime;
>  	time_t		f_mtime;
>  	time_t		f_ctime;
> 
> Is it possible to incorporate that in the official linux kernel tree ?
> 

You should ask Urban (CCed).  He's the one that made the patch for 2.5, and
ye'll probably have something for 2.4 and maybe 2.2.

Re: PATCH: smbfs and >2Gb files

[Urban Widmark]

On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Philippe De Muyter wrote:

> --- include/linux/smb.hbk	Fri May 31 16:43:54 2002
> +++ include/linux/smb.h	Fri May 31 17:55:49 2002
> @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@
>  	uid_t		f_uid;
>  	gid_t		f_gid;
>  	kdev_t		f_rdev;
> -	off_t		f_size;
> +	size_t		f_size;
>  	time_t		f_atime;
>  	time_t		f_mtime;
>  	time_t		f_ctime;
> 
> Is it possible to incorporate that in the official linux kernel tree ?

Doesn't this just allow smbfs to list the file? If you tried to read all
of it you'd only get the first 2G of it (or is it 4 ...), repeated over
and over.


2.5 has proper support for large files on smbfs, for 2.4 there is a patch
here:
	http://www.hojdpunkten.ac.se/054/samba/index.html
(if you can reach that site, the admins have been very "creative" lately ...)

If anything is going into 2.4 I'd prefer if that was it. Maybe for 2.4.20,
I have had some positive reports on that. Note that you need to patch
samba or else the server won't know that the client supports large files.

/Urban