David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>
> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 00:31:36 +0400
>
> The proper fix should be to make the result of the limit
> computation be accurately architecture specific.
>
>And then each and every Reiserfs partition is platform specific
>and cannot be mounted onto another Linux platform.
>
>Creating such a restriction is a grave error.
>
>
>
>
And you would cripple the 99% usage to aid those users who move disk
drives physically over to a sparc box AND have more than 31k links to a
file?
Or is there some usage pattern that I don't appreciate that makes it
highly likely that people will swap disks into a sparc? Maybe these hot
plug ruggedized with plastic covers IDE disks that there was some press
about being a substitute for DVDs a few months ago?
Frankly, I had doubts about our code that causes CPU order to not be
used in the disk format, but I was persuaded that it was not a
measurable performance loss to do it and said yes.
I recognize that you may see things from a perspective that I have not
experienced, so please articulate on that if so.
Hans
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 22:00:23 EST