Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161172AbWHJLLF (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 07:11:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161168AbWHJLLF (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 07:11:05 -0400 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:4750 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161166AbWHJLLD (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 07:11:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:05:21 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@scrub.home To: Andrew Morton cc: cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] sector_t format string In-Reply-To: <20060809234019.c8a730e3.akpm@osdl.org> Message-ID: References: <1155172843.3161.81.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060809234019.c8a730e3.akpm@osdl.org> 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: 729 Lines: 19 Hi, On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Andrew Morton wrote: > That also being said... does a 32-bit sector_t make any sense on a > 48-bit-blocknumber filesystem? I'd have thought that we'd just make ext4 > depend on 64-bit sector_t and be done with it. Is this really necessary? There are a few features, which would make ext4 also interesting at the low end (e.g. extents). Storing 64bit values on disk is fine, but they should be converted to native values as soon as possible. bye, Roman - 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/