From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 04:58:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 04:57:51 -0400 Received: from router-100M.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.17]:24590 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 15 May 2001 04:57:43 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.4 To Pending Device Number Registrants To: ahu@ds9a.nl (bert hubert) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:54:33 +0100 (BST) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (Linux Kernel Mailing List), torvalds@transmeta.org In-Reply-To: <20010515094835.A13650@home.ds9a.nl> from "bert hubert" at May 15, 2001 09:48:36 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > So I would think that this block of new major number allocations holds for > 2.5 and not 2.4. Also, if I'm correct, 2.4 won't be needing a lot of new > major numbers anyhow. I wouldnt bet on that. Going to a 32bit dev_t internally without user space noticing would keep it seems to be quite doable if we have to. Right now doesnt worry me, in 2 years time when 2.6 is approaching release the picture might have changed a fair bit