Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: possible SCSI device numbering solution | Date | Tue, 25 Jun 1996 01:42:51 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Andrew E. Mileski" <> |
| |
> There is little point going through the disruption that changing it would > be, to change it again, so we may as well go to a 64 bit dev_t. One > thing tho, would we even need more than 65536 major devices? ie 16 bit > major, 48 bit minor (or 281474976710656 minor numbers (2.8*10^14) ;)
I'm reminded of somebody saying, "they'll never need more than 640k". :-/
But anyhoot, 16/48 bit majors/minors seems reasonable to me. Of course, this is a blind guess - we really should discuss how majors/minors will be assigned and used first. We could easily gobble up 128-bits with a poor system, or, improve the current one and stick with 16-bits.
-- Andrew E. Mileski mailto:aem@ott.hookup.net My home page http://www.redhat.com/~aem/ Linux Plug-and-Play Project Leader. See URL http://www.redhat.com/pnp/
Red Hat Software sponsors these pages - I have no other affilitation with Red Hat Software, and I have never used any of their products.
| |