From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:45:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:45:28 -0500 Received: from nat-pool-meridian.redhat.com ([12.107.208.200]:32015 "EHLO devserv.devel.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:45:20 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:45:18 -0500 From: Pete Zaitcev To: Rainer Krienke Cc: Pete Zaitcev , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: 2.4.17:Increase number of anonymous filesystems beyond 256? Message-ID: <20020122124518.B27968@devserv.devel.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <200201221308.g0MD8EY16176@bliss.uni-koblenz.de> <200201221523.g0MFNst03011@bliss.uni-koblenz.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200201221523.g0MFNst03011@bliss.uni-koblenz.de>; from krienke@uni-koblenz.de on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 04:23:54PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > From: Rainer Krienke > Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:23:54 +0100 > Thanks for the hint. I fixed pmap_create() according to your proposal and now > nfsd works again. Care to share the patch? > Raising the count of elements of > unnamed_dev_in_use in fs/super.c to eg 4096 resulted in the opportunity to > mount as many NFS directories. You did not send your patch (yet again), so there is no way to tell precisely what you have accomplished. I suspect that it may create pages with same device number that belong to different mounts. I do not pretend to understand how VFS and page cache use device numbers. If device numbers are used for any indexing, pages may be mixed up with resulting data corruption. I cannot say if this scenario is likely without looking at the VFS code. Perhaps we ought to ask Stephen, Al, or Trond about it. > Why did you > Pete base your patch on 4 new major device numbers whereas Andis patch did > not need them? He probably never tested his patch. I asked him and we'll know soon if it was so. -- Pete