Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 02:43:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Benjamin Kaduk <bjk@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Gleb Kurtsou <gleb.kurtsou@gmail.com>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r235601 - head/include/protocols Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205230240100.22739@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201205211127.34052.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201205181001.q4IA1VED044374@svn.freebsd.org> <201205180941.48076.jhb@freebsd.org> <20120518152436.GA9116@reks> <201205211127.34052.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 21 May 2012, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday, May 18, 2012 11:24:36 am Gleb Kurtsou wrote: >> On (18/05/2012 09:41), John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Friday, May 18, 2012 6:01:31 am Gleb Kurtsou wrote: >>>> Author: gleb >>>> Date: Fri May 18 10:01:31 2012 >>>> New Revision: 235601 >>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/235601 >>>> >>>> Log: >>>> Don't use ino_t in dumprestore protocol definition. >>>> >>>> Since ino_t size is about to change to 64-bits, replace ino_t used in >>>> dump protocol definition with 32-bit dump_ino_t to preserve backward >>>> compatibility. At some point, it may be necessary to use spare fields >>>> in struct in order to fully support 64-bit inode numbers. >>>> >>>> Sponsored by: Google Summer of Code 2011 >>> >>> A question about your stat changes: did you expand dev_t to 32 bits for > the >>> AFS folks, or did you leave it as 16 bits? >> >> dev_t is already 32-bit. Changing it to 64-bit was discussed at some >> point and from what I recall no decision was made: >> >> http://marc.info/?t=129119478700005&r=1&w=2 >> >> I'm going to commit preparatory changes only for now. Then publish diff >> for testing. We can still change dev_t to 64-bit if needed. Although I >> didn't work on it. > > Ah, it was 64-bit they asked for. If it is easy to do so, I'd favor changing > it since you've already done all the hard work of rolling a new stat > structure. I'd rather err on wasting 32-bits for dev_t than having to do all > this over again. Hi John, Thanks for remembering this -- I'm still pretty swamped with other stuff and missed it. It would indeed be nice for us to have a 64-bit dev_t to work with. -Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1205230240100.22739>