Re: [PATCH 2/9] sector_t format string

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:

> That also being said...  does a 32-bit sector_t make any sense on a
> 48-bit-blocknumber filesystem?  I'd have thought that we'd just make ext4
> depend on 64-bit sector_t and be done with it.

Is this really necessary? There are a few features, which would make ext4 
also interesting at the low end (e.g. extents). Storing 64bit values on 
disk is fine, but they should be converted to native values as soon as 
possible.

bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/