https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195561

--- Comment #33 from Theodore Tso (tytso@mit.edu) ---

Well, the commit seems to imply that it's only for 32-bit platforms.   I am not
an expert on make_ext4fs, and I don't have the AOSP sources on my laptop, so
it's not something I can easily investigate at the moment.  But it would
explain a lot of things; the Android team at the time would have been only
focusing on 64-bit devices, and while e2fsck and mke2fs in e2fsprogs has plenty
of regression tests, and I *do* run them on 32-bit platforms from time to time
for e2fsprogs, make_ext4fs.... not so much.   (As far as I know it has no
regression tests.)

Which brings me to my next question I'm asking out of curiosity.   Why, in
2017, are you trying to build 32-bit x86?    Is it just to try to save RAM?  
Are you trying to selflessly try to find 32-bit bugs when most device
manufacturers are focusing on 64-bit architectures?   :-)

(Don't get me wrong; I do KVM kernel testing for ext4 using a 32-bit x86
platform partially because it's more RAM economical, and because as an upstream
developer I am interesting in sanity checking to make sure we haven't
introduced any 32-bit regressions.   So there are good reasons to do it, but
for me I'm primarily *looking* to find problems --- in other words, I'm
knowingly asking for it.  :-)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.