[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Unify CONFIG_LBD and CONFIG_LSF handling
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 06:12:50PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > The *default* is N as that's the answer most people want. The *safe*
> > answer is Y as it won't prevent you from getting access to your data.
> > Makes sense?
> This would imply that most people with 32bit systems have 2TB files, which
> I think is rather unlikely. Distributions can turn this option on, but I
> think people who compile their own kernel, either understand this option
> or don't need it.

I think it implies exactly the opposite.

In any case, the length of this thread answers your question from earlier:
No, I won't fix bug 6719 as part of this patch. It's a completely
unrelated issue and the problem is ill-defined. It's also something
that's infinitely arguable.

The original patch is simple and fixes one problem: that architecture
people are supposed to learn about LSF and LBD when it really has no
effect on their architecture.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-06-20 18:50    [W:0.049 / U:2.020 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site