From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751418AbWFTQsO (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:48:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751415AbWFTQsO (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:48:14 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:39856 "EHLO palinux.external.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751411AbWFTQsN (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:48:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:48:11 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Roman Zippel Cc: Matt LaPlante , "'Linus Torvalds'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unify CONFIG_LBD and CONFIG_LSF handling Message-ID: <20060620164811.GM1630@parisc-linux.org> References: <000601c69481$a9f86c40$fe01a8c0@cyberdogt42> <20060620160128.GL1630@parisc-linux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 06:12:50PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > The *default* is N as that's the answer most people want. The *safe* > > answer is Y as it won't prevent you from getting access to your data. > > Makes sense? > > This would imply that most people with 32bit systems have 2TB files, which > I think is rather unlikely. Distributions can turn this option on, but I > think people who compile their own kernel, either understand this option > or don't need it. I think it implies exactly the opposite. In any case, the length of this thread answers your question from earlier: No, I won't fix bug 6719 as part of this patch. It's a completely unrelated issue and the problem is ill-defined. It's also something that's infinitely arguable. The original patch is simple and fixes one problem: that architecture people are supposed to learn about LSF and LBD when it really has no effect on their architecture.