Am Sonntag, 20. Mai 2007 08:58 schrieben Sie:
quoted text
> On Sunday 20 May 2007, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 11:16:59PM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
> > > Ken? Ball's in your court. As the patch isn't providing a killer
> > > feature for 2.6.22, I'd suggest just reverting it for now until the
> > > issues are ironed out.
> >
> > Hold it.  The real question here is which logics do we want there.
> > IOW, and how many device nodes do we want to appear and _when_ do
> > we want them to appear?
>
> of course we'd like to use exactly as many (or few) nodes as are in use
> right now and without fixed limit for their number; which implies that
> nodes should appear and go on as needed basis.
>
> But right now there is no kernel mechanism that user level program could
> use to request allocation of new loop node. I won't discuss whether it is
> legitimate to mandate new version of util-linux for kernel 2.6.22; but it
> is obvious that any kernel patch that adds such mechanism goes far beyond
> simple bug fix and is not acceptable at this stage.
>
> So let's revert this change and discuss it for post-2.6.22 timeframe.

Hi,

I am of course not a fan of limiting the maximum of available loops to 8.

My question / proposal for now would be:

Could anybody of you please be kind enough and write / provide me a counter 
patch supplying me:

a. a compilable 2.6.22-rc2 kernel
b. a loop device that can mount up to 8 iso-images

I would prefer this thing as outline attachment due to Email client 
wordwrapping problems.

Looking happily forward to a functionable counter patch to resolve the current 
issue as a compromise solution,

Best regards and thanks

Uwe
-
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/