-- Dave
At 03:46 PM 6/23/2004, Gurol Akman wrote:
Is there a technical reason for using hard-coded major numbers in LiS drivers? Wouldn't it be more convenient if all LiS drivers supported dynamic major number assignment (i.e., based on use of reserved major number 0)? This would satisfy the needs of all, I'd think. Regards -- GA
- -----Original Message-----
- From: Dave Grothe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
- Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 4:40 PM
- To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linuxstreams
- Subject: Re: [Linux-streams] LiS 2.17.P Clone driver major number change.
- It was merely an attempt to avoid collisions with kernel major device numbers. Is this causing people pain? I could change the default back to 220.
- -- Dave
- At 03:19 PM 6/23/2004, dan_gora wrote:
- Hi Dave...
- I noticed that the major number of /dev/clone/drvr has been changed in 2.17.P
- from 220 to 231. What was the reason for that change? Linux 2.6?
- BTW... LiS 2.17.P looks great. It is already helping the performance of at
- least one of our drivers (the one that I just tried). I'm getting 5-10%
- better throughput and 5-10% less CPU utilization without doing anything to my
- driver!
- Keep up the good work...
- thanks-
- dan
- _______________________________________________
- Linux-streams mailing list
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://gsyc.escet.urjc.es/mailman/listinfo/linux-streams
