From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Sat Jun 17 10:24:15 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50DC8BF776F; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 10:24:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDCC764346; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 10:24:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id v5HAO7ZE096948 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:24:07 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua v5HAO7ZE096948 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v5HAO79w096947; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:24:07 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:24:07 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: Mark Millard Cc: FreeBSD Current , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, FreeBSD PowerPC ML Subject: Re: INO64 in head: Does sys/boot/common/ufsread.c need its "typedef uint32_t ufs_ino_t;" replaced? Message-ID: <20170617102407.GD2088@kib.kiev.ua> References: <3AF2C2DB-1A61-4EC3-BCB7-B05D99273561@dsl-only.net> <20170617024850.GB2088@kib.kiev.ua> <73F88E18-37A1-47C6-8783-F51F131A9671@dsl-only.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <73F88E18-37A1-47C6-8783-F51F131A9671@dsl-only.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on tom.home X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 10:24:15 -0000 On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 08:54:10PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: > On 2017-Jun-16, at 7:48 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 05:01:43PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: > >> . . . > > > > UFS uses 32bit inodes, changing to 64bit is both pointless currently, and > > causes on-disk layout incompatibilities. > > > > As a consequence, use of ino_t (64bit) or uint32_t for inode numbers are > > almost always interchangeable, unless used for specifying on-disk layout. > > UFS correctly uses (and was changed to use) uint32_t for inode numbers > > in the disk-layout definitions. Other places, which calculate inode > > numbers from inode block numbers, or do some other calculations with > > inodes, are fine with either width. > > > > That is, I believe that all instances which I looked at during the > > ino64 preparation are fine. > > Thanks for letting me know --and good to know. > > I've added a note to the bugzilla report of the failed > linking of boot1.elf for powerpc and powerpc64 that > you have indicated that if the __udivdi3 is supplied to > allow the linking to complete for builds based on clang > then the result should operate okay for the mix of types. > (The report is bugzilla 220024 .) I never said that.