Re: Migrating to larger numbers

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Mon, 7 Jun 1999 11:12:59 +0100 (BST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Julian Bradfield: "[PROBLEM+PATCH] 2.X zero-length read on non-empty pipe returns EAGAIN"
Previous message: Martin Mares: "Re: RFC: Devices, buses and hotplug"

> If the dev is too big for the current format, stick -1 in the
> block pointer used by the current format, and use the N (for
> 1 <= N <= 4, depending on the filesystem) subsequent block
> pointers to hold the real device number.)
>
> I suggest, as you say, a 32:32 split (it's simple).

64bit dev_t's are going to cause some real problems. I would suggest you
try passing a 64bit dev_t over NFS - especially to non unix clients before
you do this.

If you go to a 64bit dev_t you will have to do hackish horrors for NFS support
even Linux to Linux. Stay with a 32bit dev_t, supporting more device files
than we can create 1 a second within our epoch is crazy

Alan

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

Next message: Julian Bradfield: "[PROBLEM+PATCH] 2.X zero-length read on non-empty pipe returns EAGAIN"
Previous message: Martin Mares: "Re: RFC: Devices, buses and hotplug"