Messages in this thread | | | From | Badari Pulavarty <> | Subject | Re: [patch for playing] Patch to support 4000 disks and maintain backward compatibility | Date | Fri, 11 Apr 2003 08:21:46 -0800 |
| |
On Friday 11 April 2003 07:33 am, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 06:42, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > > Here is my problem.. > > > > #insmod ips.o > > < found 10 disks> > > #insmod qla2300.o > > < found 10 disks> > > #rmmod ips.o > > <removed 10 disks> > > #insmod ips.o > > <found 10 disks - but new names> > > > > OK, I see what you mean. I agree. > > Could you elaborate on the reason you want to keep the minor space > compact? I don't regard the insmod/rmmod problem as valid because if > you do: > > rmmod ips.o > rmmod qla2300.o > insmod qla2300.o > insmod ips.o > > All bets are off again. For small kernel dev_t it was essential to keep > a compact minor space because otherwise we coulde run out of minors. > Sparse minors cause no inefficiency in the mid-layer, or in sd. There > are problems in sg which could be solved by encoding the device type in > the minor.
Here user/admin atleast knows what he is doing. So they have to deal with it. (Proper device naming solution would be great here).
But just by doing rmmod/insmod if my device names change, it will be a pain. For example, in my case, i have to re-do all my raw device bindings to just start the database. This will be a problem with dynamic <major, minor> assignments also. (Again, i will need a proper device naming solution here).
Thanks, Badari
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |