Re: 2.6.0 stability and the BK scsi trees

[Patrick Mansfield <patmans@us.ibm.com>]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 02:28:04PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 09:56:54PM +1000, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> > What was the point of putting 32 dev_t's into the
> > kernel? Many people who were advocating it used
> > the increased number of scsi disks (> 256) and
> > partitions (from 15 to 63 [to match the ide subsystem])
> > as a major reason.
> > 
> > The sd driver is still littered with hacks to distribute
> > its 256 (max) disks over 8 majors. Shouldn't this be
> > fixed?
> 
> Well, let's see some fixes and then decide whether it's worth merging
> before 2.6.0 or after 2.6.0.  We can be sure that vendors will integrate
> this patch even if it's not in mainline kernel.org ... and i'd rather
> see one variant of the patch which everybody uses than a different one
> in RH, SuSE and Linux 2.7.

If you have not seen it, Badari's sd patch is in the mm tree:

ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-test7/2.6.0-test7-mm1/broken-out/support-zillions-of-scsi-disks.patch

-- Patrick Mansfield