On 2017-Jun-17, at 3:24 AM, Konstantin Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 08:54:10PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: >> On 2017-Jun-16, at 7:48 PM, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> >> 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. Sorry. I apparently read too much of my overall purpose into your reply to what I asked about for if the types needed to be changed in fsread.c . I've reported the "I never said that" in 220024. I've also copied and pasted your original reply for reference. Again: Sorry to have misrepresented you. === Mark Millard markmi at dsl-only.net _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
