Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762413AbZLPRMR (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:12:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762255AbZLPRMN (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:12:13 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:40155 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756364AbZLPRML (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:12:11 -0500 Message-ID: <4B29148A.70805@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:10:34 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Teigland CC: Alan Cox , Andrew Morton , Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rubini@gnudd.com, gregkh@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] misc: use a proper range for minor number dynamic allocation References: <1257813017-28598-1-git-send-email-cascardo@holoscopio.com> <1257813017-28598-2-git-send-email-cascardo@holoscopio.com> <1257813017-28598-3-git-send-email-cascardo@holoscopio.com> <4AF8B4FF.9050405@zytor.com> <20091111153632.944a255c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20091215143446.8b6a7e57.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20091215233738.26188500@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20091216180155.GA23117@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20091216180155.GA23117@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1030 Lines: 27 On 12/16/2009 10:01 AM, David Teigland wrote: > > I explained here http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/9/379 that the dlm does not > use as many misc devices as has been implied. It starts with 3, and adds > one for each *userspace* lockspace. There are very few applications (I > know of 3) that create userspace lockspaces, and they each create about > one each. > > That said, I still intend to rework the dlm to use a single device for all > lockspaces. > Still seems to make more sense to simply move it to a major and/or a dynamic allocation. misc devices were always meant to be *one of a kind* devices, which simply didn't need anything but a single allocation. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- 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/