From: Grzegorz Kulewski <kangur@polcom.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>, Andries Brouwer <aebr@win.tue.nl>,
Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: support of older compilers
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 22:59:35 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0411052242090.3255@alpha.polcom.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411051203470.2223@ppc970.osdl.org>
> The kernel does do more these days than it did in '95. But 6 times more? I
> dunno..
Can't we remove ramfs for a good start? Everyone should use tmpfs instead
and some stupid distributions (I will not tell their names) try to mount
ramfs on /dev (udev) and that leads to very stupid panic if you will
write for example:
dd if=/dev/evms/sda5 of=/dev/sda17 bs=1024
instead of "of=/dev/evms/sda17".
Explanation (if anybody needs one):
Kernel can't create more partition devices than 15 for SCSI and SATA disks
because of lack of minor numbers. So I am using evms to create these
devices. So I should use /dev/evms/sda* for these partitions. And if I
will not remember to do so then I will get oom panic very shortly because
ramfs is not limited (in contrary to tmpfs).
And this kind of stupid mistake can happen. It happened to me 3 times in a
row before I started to debug what is wrong with this kernel.
[BTW. Does somebody know how to tell the kernel that I do not want
/dev/sda[0-9]* files (but I do want /dev/hda files) created == I do not
want kernel partition driver to touch this particular device?]
And using ramfs for anything else can easily lead to similar problems. So
I think we do not need ramfs. Am I wrong? [I understand that removing it
will not remove much code.]
Thanks,
Grzegorz Kulewski
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-05 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-03 21:02 Timothy Miller
2004-11-03 21:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-11-03 21:22 ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-11-03 23:06 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-03 23:30 ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-11-04 16:50 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-04 17:00 ` Chris Friesen
2004-11-04 18:17 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-05 20:00 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-11-05 20:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-11-05 20:31 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-11-04 17:04 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-11-04 18:15 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-04 18:31 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-11-04 21:56 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-04 18:54 ` Ian Romanick
2004-11-04 19:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-11-04 20:14 ` Giuseppe Bilotta
2004-11-05 20:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-11-04 19:36 ` Ian Hastie
2004-11-04 20:02 ` Ioan Ionita
2004-11-04 20:03 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-04 20:08 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-11-04 19:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-04 21:47 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-04 21:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-04 23:39 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-04 23:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-05 1:41 ` Andries Brouwer
2004-11-05 15:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-05 15:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-11-05 16:22 ` linux-os
2004-11-05 19:50 ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-11-05 20:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-05 21:59 ` Grzegorz Kulewski [this message]
2004-11-05 22:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-05 23:02 ` [PATCH] change Kconfig entry for RAMFS (Was: Re: support of older compilers) Grzegorz Kulewski
2004-11-05 23:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-05 23:44 ` [PATCH] change Kconfig entry for RAMFS Grzegorz Kulewski
2004-11-06 0:48 ` Grzegorz Kulewski
2004-11-09 23:24 ` Matt Mackall
2004-11-10 10:40 ` Grzegorz Kulewski
2004-11-10 20:50 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-11-05 23:27 ` [PATCH] change Kconfig entry for RAMFS (Was: Re: support of older compilers) DaMouse
2004-11-05 23:49 ` Grzegorz Kulewski
2004-11-06 13:59 ` DaMouse
2004-11-05 22:08 ` support of older compilers Hua Zhong
2004-11-06 8:38 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-11-06 9:43 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-11-06 11:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-11-05 22:37 ` support of older compilers [u] Martin Schlemmer [c]
2004-11-05 23:14 ` Grzegorz Kulewski
2004-11-05 23:38 ` chibiryuu
2004-11-06 12:07 ` support of older compilers Andries Brouwer
2004-11-06 17:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-11-06 19:36 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-06 21:41 ` bloat Andries Brouwer
2004-11-06 22:07 ` bloat Adrian Bunk
2004-11-06 21:30 ` bloat Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2004-11-07 13:37 ` bloat Frank van Maarseveen
2004-11-05 20:20 ` support of older compilers Willy Tarreau
2004-11-05 22:19 ` Adam Heath
2004-11-04 22:36 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-11-04 20:48 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-11-04 22:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-11-03 21:17 ` Matti Aarnio
2004-11-03 21:37 ` Giacomo A. Catenazzi
2004-11-03 21:57 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-11-04 2:16 ` Miles Bader
2004-11-03 22:07 ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-11-04 19:33 Clayton Weaver
2004-11-05 15:36 ` Nix
2004-11-04 22:49 Xose Vazquez Perez
2004-11-06 9:07 Clayton Weaver
2004-11-09 17:39 ` Nix
[not found] <2Xj2s-5vj-33@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-11-06 10:15 ` Anton Ertl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.60.0411052242090.3255@alpha.polcom.net \
--to=kangur@polcom.net \
--cc=aebr@win.tue.nl \
--cc=cw@f00f.org \
--cc=doogie@debian.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®