From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Nov 14 20:40:35 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6A68637B401; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 20:40:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id F296E43E75; Thu, 14 Nov 2002 20:40:24 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gAF4drpk090515;
	Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:39:53 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:39:46 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <20021114.213946.45875394.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: julian@elischer.org
Cc: jkh@FreeBSD.ORG, re@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: patches for sysinstall (4.x) for >1TB disks
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211141242130.36211-200000@InterJet.elischer.org>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211141242130.36211-200000@InterJet.elischer.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.2 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-hackers.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-hackers>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In message: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211141242130.36211-200000@InterJet.elischer.org>
            Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes:
: If I get no complaints I'll commit these to 4.x.
: It's all different in 5.x so an MFC doesn't really work..

Is there any reason that you didn't just jump to int64_t for blocks
and such?  You have a limit of 2T still with these patchs.  I don't
know if the drivers would support more than this, but it wouldn't hurt
to have the upper layers know how to do it once there's driver
support...  In current daddr_t is __int64_t, but only int32_t in
-stable.  Of course, -stable can't support more than 2T, so maybe this
is moot.

Ideally, you'd make sure that you can do this on -current with the
massively different code, and suggest patches if not.

Warner

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message