From: Tomas M <tomas@slax.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:53:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <460FE380.2050608@slax.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070330141524.5f6cff29.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:25:37 -0700
> "Ken Chen" <kenchen@google.com> wrote:
>
>> -module_param(max_loop, int, 0);
>> -MODULE_PARM_DESC(max_loop, "Maximum number of loop devices (1-256)");
>
> So.. this change will cause a fatal error for anyone who is presently
> using max_loop, won't it? If they're doing that within their
> initramfs/initrd/etc then things could get rather ugly for them.
I consider myself the most precious user of max_loop.
The max_loop parameter would cause a fatal error only in the case if you
modprobe loop manually, for example:
$ modprobe loop max_loop=200
But people don't usually use this, read below.
> I don't know how much of a problem this will be in practice - do
> people use max_loop much?
yes, but no as a module parameter.
People usually use max_loop as a 'kernel boot parameter' passed in
APPEND section in a boot loader (such as LILO for example), not as a
parameter for module in initrd. Why? Because it's easier; people are
lazy, people compile loop.c into kernel so they don't need to update the
loop.ko module in initrd every time a new Kernel is released.
I believe that IF you _really_ need to preserve the boot parameter, then
the parameter should _not_ be ignored, rather it should have the same
function like before - to limit the loop driver so if you use
max_loop=10 for example, it should not allow loop.c to create more than
10 loops.
And if no parameter is used at all, there will be unlimited amount of
loops. Simply clever :)
This will make it _completely_ backward-compatible, with very small code
change I guess.
Just my two cents.
Thank you for reading so far.
Tomas M
slax.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-01 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-30 7:53 [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit Ken Chen
2007-03-30 8:48 ` Ken Chen
2007-03-30 9:07 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-03-30 9:25 ` Ken Chen
2007-03-30 16:16 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-03-30 21:15 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-30 22:06 ` Ken Chen
2007-03-30 22:50 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-31 17:07 ` Greg KH
2007-03-31 17:41 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-01 4:16 ` Ken Chen
2007-04-04 10:31 ` Tomas M
2007-04-04 18:47 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-01 16:53 ` Tomas M [this message]
2007-04-01 16:57 ` Tomas M
2007-04-01 18:10 ` Ken Chen
2007-04-01 19:06 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-04-06 20:33 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-04-07 16:18 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-04-07 16:34 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-03-30 21:46 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-30 21:52 ` Jan Engelhardt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-04-01 9:16 devzero
2007-04-01 10:53 devzero
2007-04-01 18:03 ` Ken Chen
2007-04-01 19:00 ` Jeff Dike
2007-04-01 18:36 devzero
2007-04-01 18:43 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-04-01 18:54 devzero
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=460FE380.2050608@slax.org \
--to=tomas@slax.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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