2.5.28 and partitions
Quoted 8 lines · Anton Altaparmakov
Quoted 2 lines · Alexander Viro
Al, still thinking that anybody who does mkfs.<whatever> on a multi-Tb device should seek professional help of the kind they don't give on l-k...
Why? What is wrong with large devices/file systems? Why do we have to break up everything into multiple devices? Just because the kernel is "too lazy" to implement support for large devices? Nobody cares if 64bit code is 10-20% slower than 32bit code on a storage server. The storage devices are
But I care whether gcc barfs on code or not, and whether generated code is correct or not.
I do very trivial 64bit computations in TV-Out portion of matroxfb, but I spent two days shifting code up/down, adding temporary variables and splitting expressions to simple ones to make code compilable at all with gcc-2.95.4 compiling module for PIII kernel (Debian bug #151196). So I personally cannot recommend doing any 64bit math without setting gcc-3.0 as minimal version for ia32 architecture.
Petr Vandrovec [email protected]
Quoted 5 lines · Petr Vandrovec
Quoted 4 lines · Anton Altaparmakov
Quoted 2 lines · Alexander Viro
Al, still thinking that anybody who does mkfs.<whatever> on a multi-Tb device should seek professional help of the kind they don't give on l-k...
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 1 line
Why? What is wrong with large devices/file systems? Why do we have to
break
Quoted 3 lines
up everything into multiple devices? Just because the kernel is "too lazy" to implement support for large devices? Nobody cares if 64bit code is 10-20% slower than 32bit code on a storage server. The storage devices are
But I care whether gcc barfs on code or not, and whether generated code is correct or not.
Everyone cares about that! That has nothing to do with performance. It's simply a broken compiler which needs fixing.
Quoted 6 lines
I do very trivial 64bit computations in TV-Out portion of matroxfb, but I spent two days shifting code up/down, adding temporary variables and splitting expressions to simple ones to make code compilable at all with gcc-2.95.4 compiling module for PIII kernel (Debian bug #151196). So I personally cannot recommend doing any 64bit math without setting gcc-3.0 as minimal version for ia32 architecture.
Thanks for the warning. I will keep an eye out for eventual "NTFS is broken with gcc-2.95 reports"... Although I would make that gcc-2.96 and not 3.0 as minimum requirement. At least I haven't found anything wrong with the current gcc-2.96...
(Please let's not start another flamewar about whether gcc-2.96 exists or not.)
Best regards,
Anton
Signature · 5 lines
"I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown -- Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cantab.net> (replace at with @) Linux NTFS Maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.openprojects.net WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/
Quoted 7 lines · Anton Altaparmakov
Quoted 2 lines · Petr Vandrovec
But I care whether gcc barfs on code or not, and whether generated code is correct or not.
Everyone cares about that! That has nothing to do with performance. It's simply a broken compiler which needs fixing.
...
Unfortunately the 2.95 branch of gcc is more or less dead: Noone maintains it and no new release is planned. It's perhaps a more useful work to get the kernel compiling with gcc 3.1/3.2 ...
Quoted 3 lines
Best regards,
Anton
cu
Adrian
Signature · 3 lines
You only think this is a free country. Like the US the UK spends a lot of time explaining its a free country because its a police state. Alan Cox