xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: inode64 and 64bit kernel with 32bit userspace

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: inode64 and 64bit kernel with 32bit userspace
From: Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:20:32 +0100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <512244CE.5030008@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20130218094320.GA24644@xxxxxxx> <512244CE.5030008@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On 18.02.2013 09:12, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 2/18/13 3:43 AM, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > 
> > The more or less simple question is:
> > Is the requirement for 32bit programs to support 64bit inodes the same 
> > as LFS(Large File Support)?
> > 
> > IOW if a programs was compiled with FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 (if i remember 
> > that name correctly) should it work?
> 
> I think so (I don't know where the formal documentation is, 
> http://users.suse.com/~aj/linux_lfs.html is an old but still good
> over view I think).  From open(2):
> 
>        EOVERFLOW
>               (stat())  path refers to a file whose size cannot be represented
>               in the type       off_t.  This can  occur  when  an  application
>               compiled  on  a  32-bit  platform without -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
>               calls stat() on a file whose size exceeds (2<<31)-1 bits.
> 
> EOVERFLOW can happen if the inode nubmer doesn't fit in a (32-bit)
> stat struct as well.

I've looked into /usr/include/sys/stat.h

And i see this:
# ifndef __ino_t_defined
#  ifndef __USE_FILE_OFFSET64
typedef __ino_t ino_t;
#  else
typedef __ino64_t ino_t;
#  endif
#  define __ino_t_defined
# endif

So ino_t really is __ino64_t when compiled with the LFS option, which 
answers my original question. :-)

Besides i don't have that many programs that (should) care about inodes. 
Of the top of my head i care about rsync/perl/find/ln/ls, which 
apparently work correctly.




-- 

Matthias

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>