On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 01:12 +0000, Love, Robert W wrote: > >> + ctlr->id = atomic_inc_return(&ctlr_num) - 1; > > Does this work properly over the long run? Shouldn't you use the > idr > > interface instead, to keep holes from showing up? > > I'm not familiar wit the idr interface. I'll ask around and fix this. > The rule of thumb we've been using for idr in SCSI is that we don't bother with it unless the name space is constrained. So for sd<x> we use it because we have a limited device space to fill (constrained by minor numbers) for target<n> we just use an incrementing counter because <n> is unconstrained. James -- 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
