Re: [RHEL5 PATCH 2/4] VFS: Make inode numbers 64-bits

From: Al Viro
Date: Tue Aug 15 2006 - 05:00:34 EST

On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:32:57AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > NAK. There's no need to touch i_ino and a lot of reasons for not doing
> > that.
> Like all those printks that write ambiguous messages because they can't report
> the full inode number? I'm not so worried about those because they're for the
> most part debugging messages, but still, they *can* report invalid information
> because i_ino is not big enough in error and warning messages.

In fs-independent code? How many of those do we actually have?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at