lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/4] virtio_blk: use disk_name_format() to support mass of disks naming
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 09:19:05AM +0800, Ren Mingxin wrote:
> On 03/30/2012 11:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 08:26:06AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >>On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 05:53:52PM +0800, Ren Mingxin wrote:
> >>> The current virtblk's naming algorithm only supports 263 disks.
> >>>If there are mass of virtblks(exceeding 263), there will be disks
> >>>with the same name.
> >>>
> >>>By renaming "sd_format_disk_name()" to "disk_name_format()"
> >>>and moving it into block core, virtio_blk can use this function to
> >>>support mass of disks.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Ren Mingxin<renmx@cn.fujitsu.com>
> >>I guess it's already way too late but why couldn't they have been
> >>named vdD-P where both D and P are integers denoting disk number and
> >>partition number? [sh]dX's were created when there weren't supposed
> >>to be too many disks, so we had to come up with the horrible alphabet
> >>based numbering scheme but vd is new enough. I mean, naming is one
> >>thing but who wants to figure out which sequence is or guess what
> >>comes next vdzz9? :(
> >>
> >>If we're gonna move it to block layer, let's add big blinking red
> >>comment saying "don't ever use it for any new driver".
> >And also let's make that clear in the function name - say,
> >format_legacy_disk_name() or something.
>
> So, to legacy disks [sh]d, we'd name them as [sh]d[a-z]{1,}. To new devices
> like vd, we'd name them as vd<index>(vd<index>p<partno> as partitions)?

Pleae don't rename virtio disks, it is way too late for that:
virtio block driver was merged around 2007, it is not new by
any measure, and there are many systems out there using
the current naming scheme.

> And how about the rssd in the patch 3 then?

Probably same. Renaming existing devices will break setups.
I think the idea is to avoid using the
legacy naming in new drivers *that will be added from now on*.

> Besides, does anybody have comments?
> Looking forward to your replies ;-)
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Ren


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-02 09:23    [W:0.058 / U:59.596 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site