Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753557AbWKGWLh (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Nov 2006 17:11:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753691AbWKGWLe (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Nov 2006 17:11:34 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:42629 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753586AbWKGWKA (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Nov 2006 17:10:00 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] make last_inode counter in new_inode 32-bit on kernels that offer x86 compatability From: Jeff Layton To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: J?rn Engel , Eric Sandeen , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20061107212012.GC27140@parisc-linux.org> References: <454FA032.1070008@redhat.com> <20061106211134.GB691@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <454FAAF8.8080707@redhat.com> <1162914966.28425.24.camel@dantu.rdu.redhat.com> <20061107172835.GB15629@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <20061107174217.GA29746@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <20061107175601.GB29746@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <1162928464.28425.59.camel@dantu.rdu.redhat.com> <20061107204135.GF29746@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <1162933980.28425.64.camel@dantu.rdu.redhat.com> <20061107212012.GC27140@parisc-linux.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 17:09:57 -0500 Message-Id: <1162937397.3689.5.camel@tleilax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1.1 (2.8.1.1-3.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1126 Lines: 30 On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 14:20 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 04:13:00PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > > + /* ino must not collide with any ino assigned in the loop below. Set > > + it to the highest possible inode number */ > > + inode->i_ino = (1 << (sizeof(s->s_lastino) * 8)) - 1; > > This really isn't a good idiom to be using; GCC now takes this to mean > "I can reformat your hard drive because you did something outside the > spec". > > Try instead: > + inode->i_ino = -1; > The problem there is that on platforms with a 64-bit ino_t, this will be too large to fit in a 32-bit field and we'll end up with the same EOVERFLOW problem. Is there a more correct way to make it size appropriately given the different possible sizes of s_lastino? I suppose we could just set it to 0xffffffff and hope that that is "big enough" for most cases. -- Jeff - 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/