Re: [PATCH] pipefs unique inode numbers

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Jeff Layton wrote:
> 
> Also, that patch would break many 32-bit programs not compiled with large
> offsets when run in compatibility mode on a 64-bit kernel. If they were to
> do a stat on this inode, it would likely generate an EOVERFLOW error since
> the pointer address would probably not fit in a 32 bit field.
> 
> That problem was the whole impetus for this set of patches.

Well, we have that problem with the slowly incrementing "last_ino" too.

Should we make "last_ino" be "static unsigned int" instead of "long"?

Does anybody actually even use the old stat() with 32-bit interfaces? We 
warn for it, and we've done so for a long time.. I dont' remember people 
even complaining about the warning, so..

		Linus
-
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/