Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S261907AbTCaXGi>; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:06:38 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S261908AbTCaXGi>; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:06:38 -0500
Received: from [81.2.110.254] ([81.2.110.254]:23036 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S261907AbTCaXGh>;
	Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:06:37 -0500
Subject: Re: 64-bit kdev_t - just for playing
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>, bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl>,
       Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Wim Coekaerts <Wim.Coekaerts@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303312215020.5042-100000@serv>
References: <UTC200303272027.h2RKRbf27546.aeb@smtp.cwi.nl>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303272245490.5042-100000@serv>
	 <1048805732.3953.1.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303280008530.5042-100000@serv>
	 <20030327234820.GE1687@kroah.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303281031120.5042-100000@serv>
	 <20030328180545.GG32000@ca-server1.us.oracle.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303281924530.5042-100000@serv>
	 <20030331083157.GA29029@outpost.ds9a.nl>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303311039190.5042-100000@serv>
	 <20030331172403.GM32000@ca-server1.us.oracle.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303312215020.5042-100000@serv>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: 
Message-Id: <1049149133.1287.1.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) 
Date: 31 Mar 2003 23:18:54 +0100
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 943
Lines: 23

On Mon, 2003-03-31 at 22:32, Roman Zippel wrote:
> 1. How do we want to manage dev_t numbers in the future?

Mostly dynamically it seems

> 2. What compromises can we make for 2.6?

Defaulting char devices to 256 minors and a lot of space so stuff doesnt
break. Viro has done the block stuff and we have the scope to do sane
stuff like /dev/disk/.. for all disks now.

> Without answering these questions now, we risk to pay heavily for it 
> later. The ones who ask now for a larger dev_t the loudest are likely the 
> first to demand later not change anything for "compability", because they 
> hardcoded certain assumptions about dev_t into their applications.

Glibc already has a bigger dev_t

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/