From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752145AbXDDRnF (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 13:43:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752149AbXDDRnF (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 13:43:05 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:49415 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752145AbXDDRnB (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2007 13:43:01 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 10:42:19 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Dave Dillow , Gene Heskett , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ray-gmail@madrabbit.org, amanda-hackers@amanda.org, amanda-users@amanda.org Subject: Re: plain 2.6.21-rc5 (1) vs amanda (0) Message-Id: <20070404104219.40e25b6a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070404084530.GB1556@elte.hu> References: <200704010100.19016.gene.heskett@verizon.net> <2c0942db0704010033r61f967c3y7d05e3ec0a9f6931@mail.gmail.com> <200704011141.53105.gene.heskett@verizon.net> <200704020021.02393.gene.heskett@gmail.com> <1175488272.3161.28.camel@obelisk.thedillows.org> <1175661256.31439.23.camel@obelisk.thedillows.org> <20070404084530.GB1556@elte.hu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 10:45:30 +0200 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dave Dillow wrote: > > > > Then it is a matter of figuring out why the device number changed -- > > > I'm thinking it is device-mapper, but will look closer tomorrow. > > > > This commit is the one that changed it: > > > > commit fdf892be32d84a1745fa0aee5fc60517421b8038 > > Author: Andrew Morton > > Date: Mon Feb 12 00:51:44 2007 -0800 > > > > [PATCH] register_blkdev(): don't hand out the LOCAL/EXPERIMENTAL majors > > > > As pointed out in http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7922, > > dynamic blockdev major allocation can hand out majors which LANANA > > has defined as being for local/experimental use. > > i dont think we should break backwards compatibility with a system that > has not changed any hardware. Andrew, should we revert this? Well that's an odd thing for a backup program to be doing - there are any number of things which could cause a dynamically-allocated major to change. ho hum, yes, I guess it needs to go.