Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269402AbUIYUVl (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:21:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269403AbUIYUVi (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:21:38 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:17030 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269402AbUIYUVg (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:21:36 -0400 Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 13:21:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Jeremy Allison cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =?utf-8?B?5ZCJ6Jek6Iux5piO?= , samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.6] smbfs & "du" illness In-Reply-To: <20040925195256.GB580@jeremy1> Message-ID: References: <20040917205422.GD2685@bouh.is-a-geek.org> <20040925171104.GN580@jeremy1> <20040926.024131.06508879.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <20040925174406.GP580@jeremy1> <20040925182907.GS580@jeremy1> <20040925195256.GB580@jeremy1> 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 Content-Length: 1632 Lines: 43 On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Jeremy Allison wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 12:20:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > Because right now the number is meaningless, and the Linux client is > > apparently better off ignoring it totally. > > Actually, just to be clear - the number isn't completely > meaningless, it's the actual size on disk (from the st_blocks > if they're available, filesize if not) rounded up to the nearest > 1mb boundary. Just didn't want you to think we were randomly > returning 1mb. It's a meaningful number, it's just the granularity > that's a bit off :-). I repeat: the Linux client is apparently better off ignoring it totally. That makes it meaningless, Jeremy. meaningless (vs. meaningful), nonmeaningful -- (having no meaning or direction or purpose; "a meaningless endeavor"; "a meaningless life"; "a verbose but meaningless explanation") It clearly has no meaning or direction or purpose for any sane client. After all, the only thing we can use it for is st_blocks, and since the granularity is _so_ big, we're much better off looking at the file size and guessing from that. I still don't see why you argue for that totally meaningless number. As far as I can tell, the _only_ thing it matters for is some Windows benchmark. Tell me again: why should the Linux client look at that number? Give me just _one_ valid reason. Linus - 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/