[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070331104144.46c85f27.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 10:41:44 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 10:07:43 -0700 Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:15:24PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:25:37 -0700
> > "Ken Chen" <kenchen@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > > -module_param(max_loop, int, 0);
> > > -MODULE_PARM_DESC(max_loop, "Maximum number of loop devices (1-256)");
> >
> > So.. this change will cause a fatal error for anyone who is presently
> > using max_loop, won't it? If they're doing that within their
> > initramfs/initrd/etc then things could get rather ugly for them.
> >
> > I don't know how much of a problem this will be in practice - do people use
> > max_loop much?
>
> Yes, the distros do, and they recommend it to their users a lot.
Thanks. In that case I think we should retain the max_loop module parameter
for now.
Ken, when you respin that patch could you restore max_loop, and make its
use trigger a warning along the lines of "loop: the max_loop option is obsolete
and will be removed in March 2008"?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists