Hi, On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > That also being said... does a 32-bit sector_t make any sense on a > > > 48-bit-blocknumber filesystem? I'd have thought that we'd just make ext4 > > > depend on 64-bit sector_t and be done with it. > > > > Is this really necessary? There are a few features, which would make ext4 > > also interesting at the low end (e.g. extents). Storing 64bit values on disk > > is fine, but they should be converted to native values as soon as possible. > > Consider what that means. "converted to native" means dealing with truncation > issues... Yes, it does, but I don't think it's that difficult - basically returning -EIO, it should be part of the basic error handling. Afterwards you don't have to waste cpu/memory on unused data anymore. bye, Roman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
