On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:16:55AM -0500, Bruce Fields wrote: > (Argh, sorry, with the right stable address cc'd this time I hope.) > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 03:10:04PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > FWIW, not taking ->i_lock there definitely looks like a good thing. As for > > 64bit ->i_ino itself... Looks like the main problem is the shitload of > > printks - the actual uses of ->i_ino are fine, but these suckers create > > a lot of noise. So for now I'm going with Bruce's variant; 64bit i_ino > > doesn't look too bad (even on i386, actually), but it'll have to wait > > until 3.14. Too noisy and late in this cycle... > > I believe we also want that in stable? > > 950ee9566a5b6cc45d15f5fe044bab4f1e8b62cb "exportfs: fix 32-bit nfsd > handling of 64-bit inode numbers" It breaks the build in 3.12 and others so if it is needed, please provide a backport that works properly to stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. thanks, greg k-h -- 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
