On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 06:02:04PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > How far out of "dev" are we? I'm leaning towards saying "oh well, would > > have been nicer the other way" but going ahead and just putting the > > compat handler into the kernel. > > I would be OK with changing to the "proper" struct layout. Not being able > to resize with an older e2fsprogs + newer kernel isn't going to cause any > serious problems (unlike e.g. not being able to mount or e2fsck "/"). > > If we are seriously worried about compatibility, we could add the compat > handler for 32-bit kernels (should have a different IOC number anyways > because of the struct size) and add some arbitrary check like: > > #ifdef LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION > KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,40) > #warning remove this old compat code > #endif Given that a bunch of distro's have shipped e2fsprogs 1.41.x which we advertised as being ext4 compatibility, I think we need to keep the compatibility code. If we want to add the complexity for the 32-bit side, with a 2-3 year timeout, that seems like a reasonable compromise. - 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
