Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:40:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:40:05 -0500 Received: from [166.70.28.69] ([166.70.28.69]:2879 "EHLO flinx.biederman.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:39:51 -0500 To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Andreas Dilger , LA Walsh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 64-bit block sizes on 32-bit systems In-Reply-To: <20010326181803.F31126@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <200103261747.f2QHlEX19564@webber.adilger.int> <20010326190945.I31126@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: 26 Mar 2001 11:37:52 -0700 In-Reply-To: Matthew Wilcox's message of "Mon, 26 Mar 2001 19:09:45 +0100" Message-ID: Lines: 18 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Wilcox writes: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:47:13AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > What do you mean by problems 5 years down the road? The real issue is that > > this 32-bit block count limit affects composite devices like MD RAID and > > LVM today, not just individual disks. There have been several postings > > I have seen with people having a problem _today_ with a 2TB limit on > > devices. > > people who can afford 2TB of disc can afford to buy a 64-bit processor. Currently that doesn't solve the problem as block_nr is held in an int. And as gcc compiles an int to a 32bit number on a 64bit processor, the problem still isn't solved. That at least we need to address. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/