[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:31:03 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
CC: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>,
ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC, 32-bit compat handlers for EXT4_IOC_GROUP_ADD
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 06:02:04PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>>> How far out of "dev" are we? I'm leaning towards saying "oh well, would
>>> have been nicer the other way" but going ahead and just putting the
>>> compat handler into the kernel.
>> I would be OK with changing to the "proper" struct layout. Not being able
>> to resize with an older e2fsprogs + newer kernel isn't going to cause any
>> serious problems (unlike e.g. not being able to mount or e2fsck "/").
>>
>> If we are seriously worried about compatibility, we could add the compat
>> handler for 32-bit kernels (should have a different IOC number anyways
>> because of the struct size) and add some arbitrary check like:
>>
>> #ifdef LINUX_KERNEL_VERSION > KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,40)
>> #warning remove this old compat code
>> #endif
>
> Given that a bunch of distro's have shipped e2fsprogs 1.41.x which we
> advertised as being ext4 compatibility, I think we need to keep the
> compatibility code. If we want to add the complexity for the 32-bit
> side, with a 2-3 year timeout, that seems like a reasonable
> compromise.
>
> - Ted
I tend to agree, unfortunately... I'll send the current compat patch,
then, and when/if I get motivated, add another cleaner interface+number
I guess...
-Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists