Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>
> ..
> > This should be converted to use sector_t for >2TB support, and tested
> > with CONFIG_LBD=y and n.
>
> e_block is the block number; the e_indexes are hash values. Ext[23] only has
> 32bit block numbers. Am I getting you wrong?
Well it depends how generic the mbcache code is supposed to be.
The kernel has just gained supoprt for 64-bit sectors on ia32
and PPC32 but the new mbcache code will not support that.
I guess if there are no current 64-bit users of mbcache then
it can be deferred until there is a need.
> > The use of a dev_t search key is a bit old-fashioned. Maybe
> > use the address of inode->i_sb->s_bdev?
>
> That would do as well.
>
> A related issue:
>
> Would switching to a more decent hash algorithm in fs/ext?/xattr.c make sense?
> I think there are better ones in 2.5. This would only degrade sharing on
> "legacy" systems for a while, but the slow down would vanish over time.
Might do. There's hash_long() in <linux/hash.h>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 22:00:59 EST