Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965034AbWAMVUW (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:20:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1422982AbWAMVUW (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:20:22 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:9916 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422980AbWAMVUU (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 16:20:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:19:47 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Andreas Dilger Cc: sho@tnes.nec.co.jp, torvalds@osdl.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Fix problems on multi-TB filesystem and file Message-Id: <20060113131947.05ee9ffc.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060113205152.GD7641@schatzie.adilger.int> References: <20060112183319.526b877a.akpm@osdl.org> <000101c61848$4dd3b5b0$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp> <20060113122820.18b751b0.akpm@osdl.org> <20060113205152.GD7641@schatzie.adilger.int> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2621 Lines: 55 Andreas Dilger wrote: > > On Jan 13, 2006 12:28 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > So now we're proposing to repeat the sector_t problem with a bunch of new > > fields. Fortunately we're less likely to be putting these particular > > fields into printk statements but I note that CIFS (at least) has a couple > > such statements and with your patch they're now generating warnings (and > > potential runtime bugs). > > > > On the other hand, for a fairly fat .config which has 17 filesystems in > > .vmlinux: > > > > text data bss dec hex filename > > 4633032 1011304 248288 5892624 59ea10 vmlinux CONFIG_LSF=y > > 4633680 1011304 248288 5893272 59ec98 vmlinux CONFIG_LSF=n > > > > It's probably less 0.5 kbytes for usual embedded .config. > > I just don't think the benefit of CONFIG_LSF outweighs its costs. > > We were originally going to use CONFIG_LBD, but there were some complaints > that "sector_t" isn't the right variable to use for this, even though they > are remarkably close. That would at least remove one config change. > > I don't think the cost is in the vmlinux itself, but rather that having a > long long for i_blocks is overkill for any but the very largest systems > (Lustre has been running fine w/o this, at the expense of some accuracy > for the i_blocks count on many-TB files). Growing struct inode for these > 0.0000001% of systems is probably harmful for small systems, given how > many inodes are used in a system. I'd expect that rh and suse and others will turn on the >2TB option, so that's most systems. > Two options exist IMHO: > - remove the new CONFIG_* parameters and stick with CONFIG_LBD (this could > still use a separate type from sector_t if desired) to reduce the amount > of testing combinations needed > - make the new CONFIG_* default to on and allow it to be disabled with > CONFIG_BASE_SMALL Well yes, but we still have the printk problem. CONFIG_LFS would become a specialised option for embedded systems and for the minority of people who self-compile kernels. I just don't think that's worth the maintainability hassle. Ho hum. But then, people don't printk these fields as much. I spose we could live with your option 1). And we need to find all those places (like CIFS) which are presently trying to print a blkcnt_t and add the %llu and the typecast. - 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/