linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] misc: use a proper range for minor number dynamic allocation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:10:34 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	David Teigland <teigland@...hat.com>
CC:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@...oscopio.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rubini@...dd.com, gregkh@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] misc: use a proper range for minor number dynamic
 allocation

On 12/16/2009 10:01 AM, David Teigland wrote:
> 
> I explained here http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/9/379 that the dlm does not
> use as many misc devices as has been implied.  It starts with 3, and adds
> one for each *userspace* lockspace.  There are very few applications (I
> know of 3) that create userspace lockspaces, and they each create about
> one each.
> 
> That said, I still intend to rework the dlm to use a single device for all
> lockspaces.
> 

Still seems to make more sense to simply move it to a major and/or a
dynamic allocation.  misc devices were always meant to be *one of a
kind* devices, which simply didn't need anything but a single allocation.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/