Messages in this thread | | | From | (david parsons) | Subject | Re: Migrating to larger numbers | Date | 8 Jun 1999 14:04:53 -0700 |
| |
In article <linux.kernel.19990608121009.D13308@hazel>, Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com> wrote: >Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.csiro.au> wrote: >> However, for the sake of argument, let's say we write device drivers >> and make use of dynamic device numbers. I don't actually see where the >> problem is. > >Ok, consider this scenario: > >(1) Some application is using device files over NFS. [If this isn't >happening, there's no problem with 64 bit device numbers.] Let's use >your "exporting root to legacy machines" case...
That application is probably using the device directory for the machine it's on, and if it does want to use the device directory for the server, sensible programming practice would seem to dictate being able to track changes to the devices, because servers will go down and have the hardware changed out from under you.
>(3) The NFS server gets taken down for a few minutes and disks get added >to it. [This is the case where the semantics of the device numbers >become significant.]
Do applications on other machines care what the devices on the server are?
____ david parsons \bi/ Danger, will robinson! \/
- 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/
| |