Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | Subject | Re: Larger dev_t | Date | Tue, 27 Mar 2001 14:27:16 -0500 (EST) |
| |
Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl writes: > [Linus Torvalds]
>> You'e now forced every piece of code that needs a dev_t >> to carry along the overhead of having a 64-bit field > > Let me repeat: there is no such code. In user space dev_t already is > 64 bits, whether you like it or not. We cannot go back to libc5. ... > In other words, inside the kernel the normal obvious coding will > give us ints major, minor. Outside the kernel we have a 64-bit dev_t. ... > But while dev_t already is 64-bits in user space, the same does not
In your dreams!!!!
int c_has_loose_type_checking(char *name){ struct stat sbuf; /* ... */ return sbuf.st_rdev; }
Then we have NFSv2, archive file formats, and zillions of little tools.
I enjoy truncating dev_t to a reasonable size. Sometimes I check my input arguments for illogically huge values, and other times I just relish the opportunity to inflict data loss on you personally.
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |