Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > yeah ... cannot remember why i have done it originally :-| > Might it be to do with sizeof(task_struct.comm)? > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, James Bottomley wrote: > > > Ingo, > > > > This has been in the workqueue code in day one, for no real reason that > > I can see. We just tripped over it in SCSI because the fibre channel > > transport class creates one workqueue per host with the name scsi_wq_%d > > which trips this after we get to 100. Unfortunately we just came across > > someone with > 100 host adapters ... > > > > I think the solution is just to get rid of the artificial limit. > > > > James > > > > diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c > > --- a/kernel/workqueue.c > > +++ b/kernel/workqueue.c > > @@ -308,8 +308,6 @@ struct workqueue_struct *__create_workqu > > struct workqueue_struct *wq; > > struct task_struct *p; > > > > - BUG_ON(strlen(name) > 10); > > - > > wq = kmalloc(sizeof(*wq), GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!wq) > > return NULL; > > > > - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
