From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A931C433E6 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:42:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD62764FBA for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:42:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CD62764FBA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 55C626B006C; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 15:42:00 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 4E4226B006E; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 15:42:00 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 387506B0070; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 15:42:00 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0123.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.123]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150C76B006E for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 15:42:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D44328249980 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:41:59 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77785385958.19.fold32_3302aeb275e7 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4B1B1AD1B9 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:41:59 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: fold32_3302aeb275e7 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2700 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf31.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:41:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD39564F95; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:41:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1612557718; bh=4ZWW8hUuPa5dPG125V2iEZsrPT8+OXIjRrQ4Rj9bvpA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FHz7Uf3NdrqKvSuZsiFNBBbpgRUDEmNFQhvQUNxrBN3OVNylMmK2+610apgqB1IsO aR908QslNGt/1fDPzQrxp98ipXr7b6QqZ0vkAcUmjrEwtJ5Yhj3JrOk4OBJsDibIJf jb8MuIHp89Hqw60jV09vtiUCBQpYNBRKflgf7kV4= Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 12:41:57 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Seth Forshee Cc: Hugh Dickins , Chris Down , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: Don't use 64-bit inodes by defulat with 32-bit ino_t Message-Id: <20210205124157.c9d855a373362d7bf3d811a7@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20210205202159.505612-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com> References: <20210205202159.505612-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 14:21:59 -0600 Seth Forshee wrote: > Currently there seems to be an assumption in tmpfs that 64-bit > architectures also have a 64-bit ino_t. This is not true; s390 at > least has a 32-bit ino_t. With CONFIG_TMPFS_INODE64=y tmpfs > mounts will get 64-bit inode numbers and display "inode64" in the > mount options, but passing the "inode64" mount option will fail. > This leads to the following behavior: > > # mkdir mnt > # mount -t tmpfs nodev mnt > # mount -o remount,rw mnt > mount: /home/ubuntu/mnt: mount point not mounted or bad option. > > As mount sees "inode64" in the mount options and thus passes it > in the options for the remount. > > Ideally CONFIG_TMPFS_INODE64 would depend on sizeof(ino_t) < 8, > but I don't think it's possible to test for this (potentially > CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_64BIT_INO_T or similar could be added, but I'm > not sure whether or not that is wanted). So fix this by simply > refusing to honor the CONFIG_TMPFS_INODE64 setting when > sizeof(ino_t) < 8. How about changing s390 Kconfig so that CONFIG_TMPFS_INODE64 is not enabled? > Fixes: ea3271f7196c ("tmpfs: support 64-bit inums per-sb") > Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee With a cc:stable, I assume?