On 03/30/2012 11:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 08:26:06AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 05:53:52PM +0800, Ren Mingxin wrote:The current virtblk's naming algorithm only supports 263 disks. If there are mass of virtblks(exceeding 263), there will be disks with the same name.By renaming "sd_format_disk_name()" to "disk_name_format()" and moving it into block core, virtio_blk can use this function to support mass of disks. Signed-off-by: Ren Mingxin<[email protected]>I guess it's already way too late but why couldn't they have been named vdD-P where both D and P are integers denoting disk number and partition number? [sh]dX's were created when there weren't supposed to be too many disks, so we had to come up with the horrible alphabet based numbering scheme but vd is new enough. I mean, naming is one thing but who wants to figure out which sequence is or guess what comes next vdzz9? :( If we're gonna move it to block layer, let's add big blinking red comment saying "don't ever use it for any new driver".And also let's make that clear in the function name - say, format_legacy_disk_name() or something.
So, to legacy disks [sh]d, we'd name them as [sh]d[a-z]{1,}. To new devices
like vd, we'd name them as vd<index>(vd<index>p<partno> as partitions)?
And how about the rssd in the patch 3 then?
Besides, does anybody have comments?
Looking forward to your replies ;-)
--
Thanks,
Ren
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
