On 03/30/2012 11:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 08:26:06AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 05:53:52PM +0800, Ren Mingxin wrote:
The current virtblk's naming algorithm only supports 263 disks.
If there are mass of virtblks(exceeding 263), there will be disks
with the same name.
By renaming "sd_format_disk_name()" to "disk_name_format()"
and moving it into block core, virtio_blk can use this function to
support mass of disks.
Signed-off-by: Ren Mingxin<renmx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I guess it's already way too late but why couldn't they have been
named vdD-P where both D and P are integers denoting disk number and
partition number? [sh]dX's were created when there weren't supposed
to be too many disks, so we had to come up with the horrible alphabet
based numbering scheme but vd is new enough. I mean, naming is one
thing but who wants to figure out which sequence is or guess what
comes next vdzz9? :(
If we're gonna move it to block layer, let's add big blinking red
comment saying "don't ever use it for any new driver".
And also let's make that clear in the function name - say,
format_legacy_disk_name() or something.
So, to legacy disks [sh]d, we'd name them as [sh]d[a-z]{1,}. To new devices
like vd, we'd name them as vd<index>(vd<index>p<partno> as partitions)?
And how about the rssd in the patch 3 then?
Besides, does anybody have comments?
Looking forward to your replies ;-)
--
Thanks,
Ren
--
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
