Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 01 Apr 2007 20:36:11 +0200 | From | devzero@web ... | Subject | Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit |
| |
>Blame on the dual meaning of max_loop that it uses currently: to >initialize a set of loop devices and as a side effect, it also sets >the upper limit. People are complaining about the former constrain, >isn't it? Does anyone uses the 2nd meaning of upper limit? > >- Ken
what sense would it make to set an upper limit at all?
we`re so happy to have none anymore :)
i think andrew`s suggestion is just good:
>So if we're worried about not breaking existing setups, we should retain >this module parameter as a do-nothing thing, maybe with a >this-is-going-away warning printk, too.
roland
_______________________________________________________________ SMS schreiben mit WEB.DE FreeMail - einfach, schnell und kostenguenstig. Jetzt gleich testen! http://f.web.de/?mc=021192
- 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/
| |