Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161490AbWHJNJK (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:09:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161484AbWHJNJK (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:09:10 -0400 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:44942 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161292AbWHJNJI (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2006 09:09:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:08:54 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@scrub.home To: Jeff Garzik cc: Andrew Morton , 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: <44DB27A3.1040606@garzik.org> Message-ID: References: <1155172843.3161.81.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060809234019.c8a730e3.akpm@osdl.org> <44DB203A.6050901@garzik.org> <44DB25C1.1020807@garzik.org> <44DB27A3.1040606@garzik.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: 603 Lines: 19 Hi, On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Or you could just not bother, and leave everything as u64. > > > > Why? > > To eliminate needless complexity and keep things simple and obvious? Considering the amount of complexity we add for the high end, why is it suddenly a bad thing to add even a _little_ complexity for the other end? 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/