Re: [PATCH 00/61] vfs: change inode->i_ino from unsigned long to u64
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.ecryptfs,dev.linux.lists.fsverity,dev.linux.lists.netfs,dev.linux.lists.ntfs3,dev.linux.lists.nvdimm,dev.linux.lists.ocfs2-devel,dev.linux.lists.v9fs,net.sourceforge.lists.linux-f2fs-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.amd-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.infradead.lists.linux-mtd,org.kernel.vger.autofs,org.kernel.vger.ceph-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-cifs,org.kernel.vger.linux-ext4,org.kernel.vger.linux-fscrypt,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-hams,org.kernel.vger.linux-integrity,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-media,org.kernel.vger.linux-nfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-nilfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-x25,org.kernel.vger.linux-xfs,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.kernel.vger.selinux,org.kvack.linux-mm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 2026-02-26 at 16:49 +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 10:55:02AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote: > > The bulk of the changes are to format strings and tracepoints, since the > > kernel itself doesn't care that much about the i_ino field. The first > > patch changes some vfs function arguments, so check that one out > > carefully. > > Why are the format strings all done as separate patches? Don't we get > bisection hazards by splitting it apart this way? Circling back to this... I have a v2 series (~107 patches) that I'm testing now that does this more bisectably with the typedef and macro scaffolding that Mathieu suggested. I'll probably send it early next week. I had done it this way originally since I figured it was best to break this up by subsystem. Should I continue with this series as a set of patches broken up this way, or is it preferable to combine the pile of format changes into fewer patches? -- Jeff Layton <[email protected]>