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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 76666C433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:25:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E049064E79 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:25:38 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E049064E79 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 4C9C76B007B; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:25:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 479A76B007D; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:25:38 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 38F1B6B007E; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:25:38 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0039.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.39]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2261C6B007B for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:25:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A86824556B for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:25:37 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77803337514.08.tail21_2709a7327612 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B79C61826713A for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:25:37 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: tail21_2709a7327612 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5013 Received: from mail-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:25:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id p132so3112948iod.11 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:25:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d/zvyGkMXSWn1Irdy78f+YeinsP4PWGDw5bwcL7LGws=; b=IqE3mV57l/0g6jQ18NeRBbzGO4KaSmn3sGEsPuXDj33Yc2acsiVs7+7PCrBYM0b6Bg kZ3WJWUGQA/OQ7BbmXzrOW9EalIbBP6NXFclRakur1e/4IR1AQ8BmYCQ1Yk+bqW07ubT ZjElBazyB/RwuiTj6TLEfnpKbIWdEL1p2NmuY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d/zvyGkMXSWn1Irdy78f+YeinsP4PWGDw5bwcL7LGws=; b=hKdqMxFcea/5juuYpYlPiGvdLEUh4Z0vBmkSHNzI+BHXTy50hOdswwP/okBjo5dxM7 pFFj/v12yhjN9beEw9E0dynlHHauQL1GI+NYgE0lOoTqb3NEBqdRhc5+qoTCApEIOB65 kkG5j2yK5Dbd41lhmFUDmjolmoVJ+jEAPm54h8vPDDf2cVNzuW4n/Jm1TAJPV5pwHpCN At5EPZiXly7kgiBwNm9SFkpoeJGWyHHI18GtwkaCTsLBKbo7hyibxHssz2M0A7BVnyvd glNCTHFBmK3w6iOIW2iNjvYR0AIaotI+b/aLsEOUfkwwUmAuTQhAf458QOXFdwjiPpJy Z0QA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5310WEKhZ61KU3R7XiXH7Xna4rl5nvzqBUipBu09RF+yjTZGbbma kJkn1AL1XHNZdQXi7oiBNw9TCdot+nQbog== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzVtY+4fqf6xi+9HW/LMRx2oanA62eQ4rSBmXID/1hPpr3UzR/Zn3Cy4I9hvPrxNsFMqvXyJQ== X-Received: by 2002:a02:c644:: with SMTP id k4mr4879812jan.104.1612985136075; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:25:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-io1-f54.google.com (mail-io1-f54.google.com. [209.85.166.54]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a17sm1447990ilp.63.2021.02.10.11.25.35 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:25:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-f54.google.com with SMTP id e24so3152945ioc.1 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:25:35 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:d0:: with SMTP id r16mr2465155ilq.112.1612984646136; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:17:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210209134115.4d933d446165cd0ed8977b03@linux-foundation.org> <20210209214217.gRa4Jmu1g%akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:17:10 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch 09/14] tmpfs: disallow CONFIG_TMPFS_INODE64 on alpha To: Heiko Carstens Cc: Andrew Morton , Christian Borntraeger , Vasily Gorbik , Amir Goldstein , Chris Down , Hugh Dickins , Ivan Kokshaysky , Linux-MM , Matt Turner , mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, Richard Henderson , Seth Forshee , stable , Arnd Bergmann , Ulrich Weigand , Tuan Hoang1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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 Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 5:39 AM Heiko Carstens wrote: > > I couldn't spot any and also gave the patch below a try and my system > still boots without any errors. > So, as far as I can tell it _should_ be ok to change this. So your patch (with the fix on top) looks sane to me. I'm not entirely sure it is worth it, but the fact that we've had bugs wrt this before does seem to imply that we should do this. I'd remove the __kernel_ino_t type entirely, but I wonder if user space might depend on it. I do find #ifndef __kernel_ino_t typedef __kernel_ulong_t __kernel_ino_t; #endif in the GNU libc headers I have, but then I don't find any actual use of that, so it looks like it may be jyst a "we copied things for other reasons". On the whole I think this would be the right thing to do, but I'm a bit worried that it's more pain that it might be worth. Heiko, I think I'll leave this decision entirely to you. If you think it's worth it to avoid any possible future pain wrt this odd inode number thing for s390, just add it to the s390 tree with my ack. Because honestly, I think s390 is the only architecture that really cares by now. Linus