On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 10:09:14AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 05:39:28PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Does anyone have objections to kill the ino64 mount option? It's purely
> > a debug tool to force inode numbers outside of the range representable
> > in 32bits and is quite invasive for something that could easily be
> > debugged by just having a large enough filesystem..
> It's the "large enough fs" that is the problem. XFSQA uses
> small partitions for the most part, and this allows testing
> of 64 bit inode numbers with a standard qa config.
Well, it allows showing 64bit inode numbers to userspace. All XFS
internal codepathes are still using the smaller inode numbers and we
only add a fixed offset to them just before the inode number is returned