Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 20:43:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 20:43:03 -0400 Received: from 216-42-72-141.ppp.netsville.net ([216.42.72.141]:58268 "EHLO tiny.suse.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 20:43:01 -0400 Subject: Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: [PATCH] sparc32: wrong type of nlink_t From: Chris Mason To: Hans Reiser Cc: "David S. Miller" , shaggy@austin.ibm.com, szepe@pinerecords.com, marcelo@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aurora-sparc-devel@linuxpower.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com, linuxjfs@us.ibm.com, green@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <3D76A6FF.509@namesys.com> References: <200209042018.g84KI6612079@shaggy.austin.ibm.com> <3D766DA8.9030207@namesys. com> <20020904.163515.82835380.davem@redhat.com> <3D76A6FF.509@namesys.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 04 Sep 2002 20:49:11 -0400 Message-Id: <1031186951.1684.205.camel@tiny> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1564 Lines: 43 On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 20:36, Hans Reiser wrote: > David S. Miller wrote: > > > From: Hans Reiser > > Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 00:31:36 +0400 > > > > The proper fix should be to make the result of the limit > > computation be accurately architecture specific. > > > >And then each and every Reiserfs partition is platform specific > >and cannot be mounted onto another Linux platform. > > > >Creating such a restriction is a grave error. > > > > > > > > > And you would cripple the 99% usage to aid those users who move disk > drives physically over to a sparc box AND have more than 31k links to a > file? 31k links to a file isn't really an issue, I really doubt anyone out there is doing something like that. 31k links on a directory is a bigger problem, since each subdir is a link. The good news is that reiserfs already works around this by setting the link count to 1 and doing other checks to make sure a directory really is empty. My point isn't that we should not change the link max, it is that changing the link max is not sufficient. Portability to sparc doesn't matter one bit if it means breaking existing i386 users. Our disk format has link counts > 32k, so any reiserfs fixes for this need to expect those larger values on disk and play nicely with them. -chris - 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/