On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:10 -0700, George Anzinger wrote: > That IS strange. 1024 is on a "level" boundry, but then next level is > 2**15, not 2**11. I will take a look. Remember that the level is never filled, so maybe the smallest level just gets an offset or something? Well, you're the expert I suppose, so apologies if this didn't make sense. Just crossed my mind :) johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- From: Reuben Farrelly <[email protected]>
- Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- From: John McCutchan <[email protected]>
- Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- From: Robert Love <[email protected]>
- Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- From: George Anzinger <[email protected]>
- Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- From: John McCutchan <[email protected]>
- Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- From: George Anzinger <[email protected]>
- Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 14/15] sparc: remove use of asm/segment.h
- Next by Date: Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7
- Previous by thread: Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- Next by thread: Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]
- Index(es):