From: Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>
To: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch for playing] Patch to support 4000 disks and maintain backward compatibility
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:22:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200304101522.41236.pbadari@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <UTC200304102209.h3AM9pf11795.aeb@smtp.cwi.nl>
On Thursday 10 April 2003 03:09 pm, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote:
>
> I try to make sure there are no assumptions about the
> size or structure of device numbers anywhere outside kdev_t.h.
> In particular I object to the use of KDEV_MINOR_BITS.
>
> Apart from this formal point, there is also the practical point:
> suppose 64 = 32+32 is used, so that KDEV_MINOR_BITS equals 32.
> Then LAST_MAJOR_DISKS is 2^28 and sd_index_bits[] would be 32 MB array.
> Unreasonable.
agreed !! (I mentioned this ealier in my previous postings - sd_index_bits[]
array size)
>
> The conclusion is that the easy way out is to define MAX_NR_DISKS.
Unfortunately, MAX_NR_DISK will be dependent on KDEV_MINOR_BITS.
We can't set MAX_NR_DISKS to arbitrary value and if there are not
enought MINOR bits, it won't work. Only way to make this work is
to do dynamic major allocation and update /dev/ entries for them.
> A different way out, especially when we use 32+32, is to kill this
> sd_index_bits[] array, and give each disk a new number: replace
> index = find_first_zero_bit(sd_index_bits, SD_DISKS);
> by
> index = next_index++;
>
I wish it is that simple. We use sd_index_bits[] since we could
sd_detach() and then sd_attach() few disks. We will end up with
holes, name slippage without this. We need to know what disks are
currently being in use.
Thanks,
Badari
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-10 22:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-10 22:09 [patch for playing] Patch to support 4000 disks and maintain backward compatibility Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-10 22:22 ` Badari Pulavarty [this message]
2003-04-10 23:57 ` Roman Zippel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-13 13:59 Paul McKenney
2003-04-12 1:13 Paul McKenney
2003-04-12 14:14 ` James Bottomley
2003-04-11 21:13 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-11 19:45 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-11 20:14 ` James Bottomley
2003-04-11 23:21 ` Joel Becker
2003-04-11 18:07 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-11 19:12 ` James Bottomley
2003-04-11 11:42 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-11 14:33 ` James Bottomley
2003-04-11 16:21 ` Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-11 0:13 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-10 23:53 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-11 1:09 ` Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-11 10:09 ` Douglas Gilbert
2003-04-11 16:12 ` Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-10 23:33 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-10 23:37 ` Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-10 23:09 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-10 23:16 ` Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-10 20:39 Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-10 20:54 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-04-11 0:08 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-11 1:25 ` Badari Pulavarty
2003-04-11 15:43 ` Joel Becker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200304101522.41236.pbadari@us.ibm.com \
--to=pbadari@us.ibm.com \
--cc=Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox