Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-09 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 03:33:59PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > I'm not sure that configurations requiring more than 15 partitions are > properly described as "trivial." Which is not to disagree with your > point about required user tools, but most systems needing such tools > will be large and

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-06 Thread Bill Davidsen
H. Peter Anvin wrote: Alan Cox wrote: On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:11:52 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jan Engelhardt wrote: 15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. Now when we have 20-bit minors, can't we simply recycle some of the higher bits for additional p

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-06 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Alan Cox wrote: This was proposed ages ago. Al Viro vetoed sparse minors and it has been stuck this way ever since. If you have > 15 partitions use device mapper for it. I'd prefer it fixed but its arguable that device mapper is the right way to punt all our partitioning to userspace. Then p

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Alan Cox wrote: On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:11:52 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jan Engelhardt wrote: 15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. Now when we have 20-bit minors, can't we simply recycle some of the higher bits for additional partitions, across the b

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-05 Thread Alan Cox
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:11:52 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > 15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. > > Now when we have 20-bit minors, can't we simply recycle some of the > higher bits for additional partitions, across the board?

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Oct 5 2007 15:11, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Jan Engelhardt wrote: 15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. Now when we have 20-bit minors, can't we simply recycle some of the higher bits for additional partitions, across the board? 63 partitions seem to h

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-05 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Oct 5 2007 15:11, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> 15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. > > Now when we have 20-bit minors, can't we simply recycle some of the > higher bits for additional partitions, across the board? 63 > partitions seem to have been suf

Re: [code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-05 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Jan Engelhardt wrote: 15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. Now when we have 20-bit minors, can't we simply recycle some of the higher bits for additional partitions, across the board? 63 partitions seem to have been sufficient; at least I haven't heard anyone complain ab

[code] Unlimited partitions, a try

2007-10-05 Thread Jan Engelhardt
15 partitions (at least for sd_mod devices) are too few. So I tried the following: after scanning the disk (sda), when we know the number of partitions P on a disk, create a new block device /dev/gd0 that is a copy of sda (in terms of disk->queue, etc.). This is done using alloc_disk(P). However