Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:28:38 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] pipefs unique inode numbers |
| |
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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |