[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090610130054.GR8633@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:00:54 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: next-20090609 hangs in early user mode
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 06:00:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> d4fdcb2068eef29c03d6027aa219fa60171c6b87 is first bad commit
> commit d4fdcb2068eef29c03d6027aa219fa60171c6b87
> Author: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
> Date: Thu May 21 16:00:59 2009 -0400
>
> fs: i_flags and i_state in struct inode only need to be unsigned short
>
> Currently i_flags and i_state do not need to be an unsigned int and an
> unsigned long, respectively. (We currently use 9 i_flags bits, and 8
> i_state bits.) Changing them to be an unsigned short saves 4 bytes
> per inode on an x86 platform, and 8 bytes on an x86_64 platform.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
*gyah*
Yes, it's obviously bogus. Dropped from the tree; I don't think it's
really salvagable - even merging into one unsigned long will not be
enough, since we will end up with different locking for different bits.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists