From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S261526AbVCHGds@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S261526AbVCHGds (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Tue, 8 Mar 2005 01:33:48 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261796AbVCHGby
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 8 Mar 2005 01:31:54 -0500
Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:10182 "EHLO
	pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S261792AbVCHGbd (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 8 Mar 2005 01:31:33 -0500
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 06:31:27 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unified device list allocator
Message-ID: <20050308063127.GA2475@infradead.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
References: <20050308051818.GI3120@waste.org> <20050307213302.560de053.akpm@osdl.org> <20050308054325.GA1262@infradead.org> <20050307215035.345c3f63.akpm@osdl.org> <20050308055627.GA1515@infradead.org> <20050308061155.GK3120@waste.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050308061155.GK3120@waste.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from <hch@infradead.org> by pentafluge.infradead.org
	See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 10:11:55PM -0800, Matt Mackall wrote:
> >  - when called with the major argument as 0 it returns an unused major number
> >    from the top of the old 255 entries major list.  This should be replaced
> >    by a real dynamic dev_t allocator, similar to alloc_chrdev_region.
> 
> Umm, this replaces alloc_chrdev_region too. If instead you mean "let's
> migrate all the users to a sensible interface", I agree. And that
> means killing alloc_chrdev_region too. (baseminor makes no sense for
> dynamic allocation - you either know your prefered major and minor or
> you know neither.)

The thing is this blkdev_register useage should be replace by an API
like alloc_chrdev_region.  I don't particularly care about the actual
implementation.