Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932206AbXAaB3c (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:29:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932248AbXAaB3c (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:29:32 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:32830 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932206AbXAaB3b (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:29:31 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:28:38 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Jeff Layton cc: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de>, akpm@osdl.org, dev@sw.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pipefs unique inode numbers In-Reply-To: <45BFEE85.30203@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <45BFEE85.30203@redhat.com> 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: 991 Lines: 25 On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Jeff Layton wrote: > > Also, that patch would break many 32-bit programs not compiled with large > offsets when run in compatibility mode on a 64-bit kernel. If they were to > do a stat on this inode, it would likely generate an EOVERFLOW error since > the pointer address would probably not fit in a 32 bit field. > > That problem was the whole impetus for this set of patches. Well, we have that problem with the slowly incrementing "last_ino" too. Should we make "last_ino" be "static unsigned int" instead of "long"? Does anybody actually even use the old stat() with 32-bit interfaces? We warn for it, and we've done so for a long time.. I dont' remember people even complaining about the warning, so.. Linus - 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/