On 8/11/05, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > and anyway, it doesn't have to be unique; > > > > set_task_comm just does a strlcpy from the name, so it will be truncated > > > > (same as for a binary with > 15 character name). > > > > > > Yup. But it'd be fairly silly to go adding the /%d, only to have it > > > truncated off again. > > > > Well, but the other alternative is that we hit arbitrary BUG_ON() limits > > in systems that create numbered workqueues which is rather contrary to > > our scaleability objectives, isn't it? > > Another alternative is to stop passing in such long strings ;) > > > > What's the actual problem? > > > > What I posted originally; the current SCSI format for a workqueue: > > scsi_wq_%d hits the bug after the host number rises to 100, which has > > been seen by some enterprise person with > 100 HBAs. > > > > The reason for this name is that the error handler thread is called > > scsi_eh_%d; so we could rename all our threads to avoid this, but one > > day someone will come along with a huge enough machine to hit whatever > > limit we squeeze it down to. > > OK, well scsi is using single-threaded workqueues anyway. So we could do: > > if (singlethread) > BUG_ON(strlen(name) > sizeof(task_struct.comm) - 1); > else > BUG_ON(strlen(name) > sizeof(task_struct.comm) - 1 - 4); > > which gets you 10,000,000 HBAs. Enough? > > Ho hum, OK, let's just kill the BUG_ON. s/BUG_ON/WARN_ON/ ? -- Coywolf Qi Hunt http://ahbl.org/~coywolf/ - : 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
