On Sat, 25 May 2013 02:01:04 +0400, Vyacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > On May 24, 2013, at 11:01 PM, Jörn Engel wrote: > > On Fri, 24 May 2013 23:30:10 +0400, Vyacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > >> On May 24, 2013, at 9:54 PM, Jörn Engel wrote: > >>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:32:52 +0400, Vyacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Subject: [PATCH v5 2/2] nilfs2: use atomic_long_t type for inodes_count > >>> ... > >>>> The cp_inodes_count and cp_blocks_count are represented as > >>>> __le64 type in on-disk structure (struct nilfs_checkpoint). > >>> > >>> Isn't atomic_long_t defined to be 32bit on 32bit architectures? > >> > >> As I understand, yes. > > > > And it doesn't concern you to use a 32bit memory structure to > > represent a 64bit on-disk structure? ;) > > I suppose that you mean possibility to mount NILFS2 volume under 32 bit architecture > after working with this volume under 64 bit architecture. Am I correct? > > Have you any concrete remarks about code of the patch? Feel free to offer your vision. Replace atomic_long_t with atomic64_t and replace the various accessor functions. The on-disk data structure is 64bit, so of course you use a 64bit in-memory structure. Does it really take a vision to come up with this idea? Jörn -- People will accept your ideas much more readily if you tell them that Benjamin Franklin said it first. -- unknown -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
