Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 15:30:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 15:30:34 -0500 Received: from [209.205.76.166] ([209.205.76.166]:51468 "EHLO krusty.linuxcolombia.com.co") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 15:30:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 15:50:39 -0500 (COT) From: To: Guest section DW cc: Wichert Akkerman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Larger dev_t In-Reply-To: <20010325202115.D6759@win.tue.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Guest section DW wrote: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 05:35:01PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > In article , > > wrote: > > >a large name space allows one to omit checking what part can be > > >reused - reuse is unnecessary. > > > > You are just delaying the problem then, at some point your uptime will > > be large enough that you have run through all 64bit pids for example. > > > > Wichert. > > Yes indeed. If my box, after continually spawning 1000000000 processes > per second for 500 years crashes because pid_t overflows, I'll think > about whether I should put the test back in, or should upgrade to a > 128-bit machine. this is a no point thread, we are not going to live 500 years? a 64 bits space is more that we are going to need anyway... Juan Diego - 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/