Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751092AbVK0VXm (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:23:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751153AbVK0VXm (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:23:42 -0500 Received: from hera.cwi.nl ([192.16.191.8]:44474 "EHLO hera.cwi.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751092AbVK0VXm (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:23:42 -0500 Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 22:23:40 +0100 (MET) From: Message-Id: <200511272123.jARLNeA03057@apps.cwi.nl> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: s_maxbytes on isofs for 2.4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 916 Lines: 23 I got a problem report on the handling of large (2.4GB) files with isofs, where 2.6 was fine and 2.4 failed. Replied >I suspect that the difference between 2.4 and 2.6 is the assignment > s->s_maxbytes = 0xffffffff; >in isofs/inode.c. Could you try to add that after > s->s_magic = ISOFS_SUPER_MAGIC; >in the 2.4 source? and got the confirmation that that solves the problems. Maybe one should consider adding this in 2.4. No, I have not audited the source. If in fact there is a reason why files this size are not handled correctly, there should probably be an assignment with the largest value that is handled correctly, together with a comment. Andries - 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/