On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 04:48:32PM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: > convert all 32bit on-disk block number definitions (currently __u32, > blk_t, unsigned long, unsigned int...) to pblk_t that is defined as > __u32. In this way we are sure that blk_t is used only in memory. > Later, this would allow to make blk_t 64bit without disturbing any > programs (this would just eat more momory and use 64bit arithmetic). I *really* dislike this approach, because it makes it very hard to prove that we got all of the conversions right --- any mistakes about which instances of blk_t need to become pblk_t, and which are supposed to stay blk_t, and we end up breaking our ABI compatibility. And let's just say I have higher standards than Greg KH has shown with udev. :-) I also don't like pblk_t, because it's not at all obvious what it means. And what if we want to support 64-bit logicial blocks someday? Then it's another painful exercise to figure out which blk_t get separated to lblk_t, etc. So my plan is to introduce a new type, blk64_t, and create new interfaces, such as ext2fs_extent_iterate(), which will use the new type --- and which will work with old-style indirect block inodes as well (it will translate indirect blocks into extents). - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
