On 10/03/2011 12:57 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 11:47 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote: >> I see no reason to limit the SCSI disk namespace to sdXXX. We test >> systems with more than 18278 LUNs. > > I suppose we kept the old limit for historical reasons, so I've no real > objection to raising it, except the error messages now need to be beefed > up. We need one for the ida_get_new() failure and the original > exhaustion messages needs to move to the sd_format_disk_name() check ... > that's now what checks we don't go over the possible size in > DISK_NAME_LEN (I know at 32 it's way beyond INT_MAX ... but just in case > someone decides to lower it) ... probably it's the same error message > (but better make it unique for the static checkers). I'll defer to your judgment on how to fix this. I didn't look at your git tree, just mainline. Just bumping up SD_MAX_DISKS is sufficient. Wrapping the calculation in another (( ...) + 1) * 26 should get us through another decade, I would think. :-) Or any reasonably high number. INT_MAX? Thanks, Shaggy -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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
