From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 6 15:24:41 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D593516A41C; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:24:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB3443D4C; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 15:24:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost.des.no [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC90B60F0; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 17:24:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from xps.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by tim.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46C360EF; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 17:24:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: by xps.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id A395633C3B; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 17:24:34 +0200 (CEST) To: Scott Long References: <82ACAD58-B179-44E2-852F-60F25C0BBBC1@FreeBSD.org> <20050606033145.GA80739@www.portaone.com> <42A3D6CF.2000504@samsco.org> <0A6C1F19-A734-4EC8-BE97-2D000D189968@FreeBSD.org> <42A453B5.3020006@samsco.org> <86oeaj1r2x.fsf@xps.des.no> <42A463EF.5060401@samsco.org> From: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:24:34 +0200 In-Reply-To: <42A463EF.5060401@samsco.org> (Scott Long's message of "Mon, 06 Jun 2005 08:55:43 -0600") Message-ID: <86fyvvqzil.fsf@xps.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on tim.des.no X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2 Cc: Suleiman Souhlal , Garance A Drosihn , current@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] IFS: Inode FileSystem X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:24:42 -0000 Scott Long writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > > This is primarily an API issue, not a filesystem layout issue. We > > already have at least one filesystem with 64-bit inodes (msdosfs). > What do you mean it's not a layout issue? We can't make incompatible > layout changes whever we feel like it, or else transportability of > filesystems is completely lost and everyone who wants to boot more > than just the Last And Greatest on their system winds up with > unnessary pain. Changing the stat(2) API to support 64-bit inodes does not require us to simultaneously change the on-disk layout of every filesystem we support to use 64-bit inodes. However, if we want to fully support filesystems with 64-bit inodes (such as FAT32, which currently uses a convoluted hack to map the 64-bit offset of a directory entry into a 32-bit inode), we need to change the API. The ironic thing is that we already have a 64-bit stat(2)... for Linux ABI compatibility. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no