Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760713AbYCYV3Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:29:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759798AbYCYV3N (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:29:13 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:35806 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759792AbYCYV3L (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:29:11 -0400 Message-ID: <47E96E15.7020105@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:26:45 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: Randy Dunlap , Mark Lord , Jens Axboe , Jeff Garzik , Tejun Heo , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , IDE/ATA development list , linux-scsi Subject: Re: What to do about the 2TB limit on HDIO_GETGEO ? References: <47E875AD.1000901@rtr.ca> <47E87942.2020409@rtr.ca> <47E88A13.70808@zytor.com> <47E90019.3050006@rtr.ca> <47E90458.7030801@zytor.com> <47E9383F.3050908@rtr.ca> <20080325192515.GA24234@suse.de> <20080325123454.4eba7644.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <47E96263.9000808@zytor.com> <20080325212032.GA24495@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20080325212032.GA24495@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1338 Lines: 29 Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 01:36:51PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>> Come on people, adding symlinks for device major:minor numbers in sysfs >>>> to save a few 10s of lines of userspace code? Can things get sillier? >>>> >>>> You can add a single udev rule to probably build these in a tree in /dev >>>> if you really need such a thing... >>>> >>>> And what's wrong with your new ioctl recomendation? >>> Ah, there's some sanity. :) >> It's not so much an issue of a few tens of lines of user space code, but >> rather the fact that something that should be O(1) is currently O(n). > > "should"? why? Is this some new requirement that everyone needs? I've > _never_ seen anyone ask for the ability to find sysfs devices by > major:minor number in O(1) time. Is this somehow a place where such > optimization is warranted? Well, when dealing with shell scripts a O(n) very easily becomes O(n^2). For the stuff that I, personally, do, it's not a big deal, but people with large number of disks have serious gripes with our boot times. -hpa -- 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/