Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Apr 2003 03:25:53 +0200 (CEST) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: 64-bit kdev_t - just for playing |
| |
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Joel Becker wrote:
> 1) Ship 2.6 with 16bit dev_t, work on a larger dev_t and perfect dynamic > devices in 2.7. > 2) Ship 2.6 with a (32|64)bit dev_t, work on a perfect dynamic scheme in > 2.7. > 3) Hold 2.6 until it can ship with (32|64)bit dev_t and perfect dynamic > devices. > > Many folks, Peter and myself included, are claiming that choice > (1) is absolutely untenable. We need more device space today, not in 3 > years when 2.7 becomes 2.8. > If I understand you correctly (and here is why I mailed), you > feel that choice (2) is the worst of the choices. You feel that we > should either choose course (1) or course (3). I'm not sure which of > those you prefer.
That misunderstanding is hopefully easy to resolve:
(4) Ship 2.6 with a (32|64)bit dev_t with an experimental dynamic scheme and keep the device numbers below 0x10000 as they are now.
bye, Roman
- 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/
| |