Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:42:30 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] misc: use a proper range for minor number dynamic allocation |
| |
On 12/15/2009 02:34 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: >>>> >>>> The proposed solution uses the not yet reserved range from 64 to 127. If >>>> more devices are needed, we may push 64 to 16. >>>> >>> >>> Again, why not push these up above 256? >>> >> >> I merged this patch, but made a note-to-self that there are remaining >> open issues.. > > And nothing else happened. Can we revisit this please? >
There seem to be people still worried about breaking userspace with majors/minors >= 256. I'm starting to think it is time to actually break userspace, and dynamic majors/minors seem as good as any place to start, especially since they by definition has to be managed by something like udev. We have had large dev_t for something like six years now, and most pieces of software isn't affected at all -- only the stuff that manages /dev.
-hpa
| |