On Apr 1 2007 11:10, Ken Chen wrote:
quoted text
> On 4/1/07, Tomas M <tomas@slax.org> wrote:
>
>> I believe that IF you _really_ need to preserve the max_loop module 
>> parameter, then the parameter should _not_ be ignored, rather it 
>> should have the same function like before - to limit the loop driver 
>> so if you use max_loop=10 for example, it should not allow loop.c to 
>> create more than 10 loops.
>
> Blame on the dual meaning of max_loop that it uses currently: to 
> initialize a set of loop devices and as a side effect, it also sets 
> the upper limit.  People are complaining about the former constrain, 
> isn't it?  Does anyone uses the 2nd meaning of upper limit?

Who cares if the user specifies max_loop=8 but still is able to open up 
/dev/loop8, loop9, etc.? max_loop=X basically meant (at least to me) 
"have at least X" loops ready.


Jan
-- 
-
unsubscribe notice
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/