Re: IA64 ino_t incorrectly sized?

From: Nathan Scott <>
Date: 2003-10-09 13:15:01
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 06:57:13PM -0700, David Mosberger wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:25:58 +1000, Nathan Scott <> said:
>   Nathan> The problem is not the interfaces - they tend to use "long"
>   Nathan> directly and will be unaffected.  When I started running our
>   Nathan> tests with large inode numbers, for the most part everything
>   Nathan> just worked.
> Argh, of course it's about interfaces.  We don't want to break
> something unknowingly because of this change.

Yes, I understand that.

> Saying that "for the
> most part everything just worked" isn't exactly reassuring!

You have misunderstood and/or I have not been clear enough.

"When I started running tests"... i.e. before I fixed this issue
in asm-ia64/posix_types.h ... "for the most part everything just
worked"... i.e. most stuff worked before, but not the thing I
fixed; but now it is fixed, and all our tests pass now, and I
know of no remaining issues.

I did not review every possible interface for use of ino_t, no.
I suppose that needs to be done, I don't have that kind of time
available just now.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Wed Oct 8 23:18:00 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:19 EST