Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932153AbVLHO1y (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:27:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932154AbVLHO1y (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:27:54 -0500 Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]:6551 "EHLO pat.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932152AbVLHO1w (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:27:52 -0500 Subject: Re: stat64 for over 2TB file returned invalid st_blocks From: Trond Myklebust To: Takashi Sato Cc: Dave Kleikamp , "'Andreas Dilger'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <02ab01c5fbeb$faf7d740$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> References: <000001c5fb1d$0a27c8d0$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> <1133963528.27373.4.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <1133967716.8910.5.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> <1133969671.27373.47.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <1133973247.8907.33.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> <02ab01c5fbeb$faf7d740$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 09:27:23 -0500 Message-Id: <1134052043.7998.26.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-3.004, required 12, autolearn=disabled, AWL 1.81, FORGED_RCVD_HELO 0.05, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL 0.14, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL -5.00) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1588 Lines: 40 On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 20:38 +0900, Takashi Sato wrote: > I prefer sector_t for i_blocks rather than newly defined blkcnt_t. > The reasons are: > > - Both i_blocks and common sector_t are for on-disk 512-byte unit. > In this point of view, they have the same character. One is a count of the number of blocks used by a file, and exists only in order to help filesystems cache this value. The other is a handle to a block. How is that the same? > - If we created the type blkcnt_t newly, the patch would have to > touch a lot of files as follows, like sector_t does. > block/Kconfig, asm-i386/types.h, asm-x86_64/types.h, > asm-ppc/types.h, asm-s390/types.h, asm-sh/types.h, > asm-h8300/types.h, asm-mips/types.h > It will be simple if we use sector_t for i_blocks. That is not a particularly good reason. > Also, I cannot imagine the situation that > 2TB files are used over > network with CONFIG_LBD disabled kernel. Is there such a thing > realistically? Apart from this and the kstat wart, there is no reason to set CONFIG_LBD for a networked filesystem. Why would you want to buy a > 2TB local disk on an HPC cluster node if you already have a server? I suppose we can make NFS use a private field instead, and just set i_blocks to 0, but that's unnecessarily wasteful too. Cheers, Trond - 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/