From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robin Holt Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] fs: allow for more than 2^31 files Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:26:12 -0500 Message-ID: <20100930202612.GM14068@sgi.com> References: <20100923121704.GR14064@sgi.com> <1285246384.362.3.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100923141037.GA3811@in.ibm.com> <20100927.153639.212415479.davem@davemloft.net> <1285645611.10438.27.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: David Miller , dipankar@in.ibm.com, holt@sgi.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, bcrl@kvack.org, den@openvz.org, mingo@elte.hu, mszeredi@suse.cz, cmm@us.ibm.com, npiggin@kernel.dk, xemul@openvz.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.179.29]:56793 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932116Ab0I3U0S (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:26:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1285645611.10438.27.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 05:46:51AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le lundi 27 septembre 2010 =E0 15:36 -0700, David Miller a =E9crit : =2E.. > Fix is to let /proc/sys/fs/file-nr & /proc/sys/fs/file-max use long > integers, and change af_unix to use an atomic_long_t instead of > atomic_t. >=20 > get_max_files() is changed to return an unsigned long. I _THINK_ we actually want get_max_files to return a long and have the files_stat_struct definitions be longs. If we do not have it that way, we could theoretically open enough files on a single cpu to make get_nr_files return a negative without overflowing max_files. That, of course, would require an insane amount of memory, but I think it is technically more correct. > --- a/kernel/sysctl.c > +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c > @@ -1352,16 +1352,16 @@ static struct ctl_table fs_table[] =3D { > { > .procname =3D "file-nr", > .data =3D &files_stat, > - .maxlen =3D 3*sizeof(int), > + .maxlen =3D sizeof(files_stat), > .mode =3D 0444, > - .proc_handler =3D proc_nr_files, > + .proc_handler =3D proc_doulongvec_minmax, With this change, don't we lose the current nr_files value? I think you need proc_nr_files to stay as it was. If you disagree, we should probably eliminate the definitions for proc_nr_files as I don't believe they are used anywhere else. Thanks, Robin