From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:30:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:30:15 -0500 Received: from vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca ([136.159.55.21]:49042 "EHLO vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:30:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:29:49 -0700 Message-Id: <200201241729.g0OHTn215645@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> From: Richard Gooch To: Pete Zaitcev Cc: Rainer Krienke , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: 2.4.17:Increase number of anonymous filesystems beyond 256? In-Reply-To: <20020124121649.A7722@devserv.devel.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <200201221523.g0MFNst03011@bliss.uni-koblenz.de> <20020122124518.B27968@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <200201240858.g0O8wnH03603@bliss.uni-koblenz.de> <20020124121649.A7722@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pete Zaitcev writes: > > From: Rainer Krienke > > Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:58:48 +0100 > > > diff -Naur linux-2.4.17.orig/fs/super.c linux-2.4.17/fs/super.c > > --- linux-2.4.17.orig/fs/super.c Fri Dec 21 18:42:03 2001 > > +++ linux-2.4.17/fs/super.c Thu Jan 24 08:23:05 2002 > > @@ -489,13 +489,13 @@ > > * filesystems which don't use real block-devices. -- jrs > > */ > > > > -static unsigned long unnamed_dev_in_use[256/(8*sizeof(unsigned long))]; > > +static unsigned long unnamed_dev_in_use[4096/(8*sizeof(unsigned long))]; > > > > kdev_t get_unnamed_dev(void) > > { > > int i; > > > > - for (i = 1; i < 256; i++) { > > + for (i = 1; i < 4096; i++) { > > if (!test_and_set_bit(i,unnamed_dev_in_use)) > > return MKDEV(UNNAMED_MAJOR, i); > > } > >[...] > > mount a very high number only limited by the bitmap unnamed_dev_in_use of NFS > > directories. The problems are: > > Rainer, you missed the point. Nobody cares about small things > such as "cannot start nfsd" while your 4096 mounts patch > simply CORRUPTS YOUR DATA TO HELL. > > If you need more than 1200 mounts, you have to add more majors > to my patch. There is a number of them between 115 and 198. > I suspect scalability problems may become evident > with this approach, but it will work. > > Trond asked if I requested numbers from HPA, and the answer is no, > because I wanted the patch in circulation for a while before it > is worth bothering. Also, I heard that LANA is closed anyways. You can use devfs_alloc_major() to safely grab unassigned majors. If necessary, I can move this to a generic area. Regards, Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca