On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:30:03 +0200 Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu 04-10-07 16:11:21, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:40:44 -0600 > > Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Oct 04, 2007 13:12 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:35:46 -0700 > > > > > ext2: Avoid rec_len overflow with 64KB block size > > > > > > > > > > into 16 bits we have for entry lenght. So we store 0xffff instead and > > > > > convert value when read from / written to disk. > > > > > > > > This patch clashes in non-trivial ways with > > > > ext2-convert-to-new-aops-fix.patch and perhaps other things which are > > > > already queued for 2.6.24 inclusion, so I'll need to ask for an updated > > > > patch, please. > > > > > > If the rel_len overflow patch isn't going to make it, then we also need > > > to revert the EXT*_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE change to 65536. It would be possible > > > to allow this to be up to 32768 w/o the rec_len overflow fix however. > > > > > > > Ok, thanks, I dropped ext3-support-large-blocksize-up-to-pagesize.patch and > > ext2-support-large-blocksize-up-to-pagesize.patch. > Sorry, for the delayed answer but I had some urgent bugs to fix... You exceeded my memory span. > Why did you drom ext3-support-large-blocksize-up-to-pagesize.patch? I forget. I'll bring it back and see what happens. > As far > as I understand your previous email (and also as I've checked against > 2.6.23-rc8-mm2), the patch fixing rec_len overflow clashes only for ext2... > I'll send you an updated patch for ext2 in a moment. ok.. I'm basically not applying anything any more - the whole thing is a teetering wreck. I need to go through the input queue delicately adding things which look important or relatively non-injurious. - 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
