markus reichelt wrote:I don't remember the names, but i remember the root causes. Here we go: The discussion started when someone with a CD-Server ran out of loops as 256 was the "fixed" maximum. The other "root"-cause was that the data-structure for the loop-devices was fixed in size at load-time, so after you load the loop-module you couldn't change anything. From "increasing" the maximum to <don't remember, but wasn't that much better> the discussion went to dynamic allocation. Dynamic allocation has the added nicety that there is a bit less waste of resources, in case you don't need so many loops and that you can scale to a large number of loops if you need to. When all the bugs and usability problems are shaken out, everybody is happy, especially the members of the "i need massive amounts of loops"-fraction. So much for the background. Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. -
| Benjamin Herrenschmidt | Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway |
| Daniel Walker | Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS] |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Hannes Eder | [PATCH 01/43] drivers/net/at1700.c: fix sparse warning: symbol shadows an earlier ... |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 16/37] dccp: API to query the current TX/RX CCID |
| Herbert Xu | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
