Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 04:50:03 -0800 (PST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Re: bin/17405: one more fstat patch Message-ID: <200003221250.EAA49354@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/17405; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Peter Edwards <peter.edwards@openet-telecom.com> Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, peter.edwards@ireland.com Subject: Re: Re: bin/17405: one more fstat patch Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:40:23 +1100 (EST) On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, Peter Edwards wrote: > Hi, > With getfname &ing 0xffff, and nfs_filestat() not doing it, you'll > never find the filesystem for an NFS inode. I guess I picked adding > one 0xffff rather than removing the rest, 'cause it seemed more likely > the single omission was in error rather than the two or three uses > of 0xffff. Well, until about 6 months ago, the nfs fsid was makedev(128 + mtype, xxxfs_mntid) (see kern_conf.c:getnewfsid()), so nfs fsids were <= 0xffff in the usual case where there have been <= 256 mount(2) calls for non-disk filesystems. > I suppose my bug is that the 0xffff is being applied inconsistently, > while the quoted PR's bug is that the 0xffff is incorrect :) > Is the 0xffff is some historical artifact, then? I think it is just a wrong fix for bogus sign extension caused by dev_t being (signed) short. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003221250.EAA49354>