On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 11:37:43AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > I am not sure if we really need count, size and cursor to be blk_t > > let alone blk64_t. It's a bit misleading because AFAICT those > > variable does not represent block numbers at all. Maybe it should be > > changed to something less confusing, preferably matching the actual > > xattr implementation ? > > Oops, I got a little too s/blk_t/blk64_t/ happy there. Those could be __u32, I > think. Or unsigned long. __u32 should be fine, yes. Could you send me an updated patch? Thanks, - 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
