From: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, akpm@digeo.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kdevt-diff
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 12:15:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030414191512.GA4917@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0304141056450.19302-100000@home.transmeta.com>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 11:00:27AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Well, the thing is, we absolutely _do_ need to have the 8+8 split, in
> order to make old devices look the same old way for old binaries.
Yes, and I support this 100%.
> The 16+16 split is not strictly necessary, but Andries pointed out to me
> that there are filesystems etc external storage that only support a 32-bit
> opaque dev_t, so we'd need to marshall the device number _some_ way for
> them anyway, and having a standard way to do that is better than having
> everybody come up with their own variations.
Sure, but it's a marshall, not a reality. One of the reasons
for choosing 64bits is that we can have large spaces for large things.
If a driver happens to get a number in the 16:16 space (or the 12:20
space, which I prefer as well), then it could run out of space and end
up with the multiple major problem.
True, a truly dynamic scheme could make all of this irrelevant,
but I was just postulating that complexity isn't strictly necessary.
I guess it is a trade off. Do all devices greater than 8:8
become 32:32 and merely are masked to 16:16 on limited filesystems, or
do all devices smaller than 16:16/12:20 appear the same on all
filesystems, limited or not?
JOel
--
"You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with
a kind word alone."
- Al Capone
Joel Becker
Senior Member of Technical Staff
Oracle Corporation
E-mail: joel.becker@oracle.com
Phone: (650) 506-8127
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-14 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-13 22:45 [PATCH] kdevt-diff Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-14 17:51 ` Joel Becker
2003-04-14 18:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-14 19:15 ` Joel Becker [this message]
2003-04-14 19:34 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-16 16:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-14 18:12 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-14 18:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-14 18:31 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-14 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-14 19:28 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-14 19:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-04-14 20:02 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-15 13:37 ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-23 15:19 ` Pavel Machek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-14 22:01 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-14 22:11 ` Joel Becker
2003-04-14 22:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-04-14 22:28 ` Joel Becker
2003-04-16 16:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-16 20:19 ` Andries Brouwer
2003-04-16 20:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-15 14:04 Andries.Brouwer
2003-04-15 14:53 ` Roman Zippel
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=20030414191512.GA4917@ca-server1.us.oracle.com \
--to=joel.becker@oracle.com \
--cc=Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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