Simon Derr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is sufficient to have a few HBAs and to insmod/rmmod the driver a
few
> times.
> Since the host_no is choosen with a mere counter increment
> in scsi_host_alloc():
> shost->host_no = scsi_host_next_hn++; /* XXX(hch): still rac
On 8/11/05, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > and anyway, it doesn't have to be unique;
> > > > set_task_comm just does a strlcpy from the name, so it will be truncated
> > >
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > What I posted originally; the current SCSI format for a workqueue:
> > scsi_wq_%d hits the bug after the host number rises to 100, which has
> > been seen by some enterprise person with > 100 HBAs.
> >
> > The reason for this name is that the error ha
James Bottomley a écrit :
Well, but the other alternative is that we hit arbitrary BUG_ON() limits
in systems that create numbered workqueues which is rather contrary to
our scaleability objectives, isn't it?
I think I'd rather the name truncation than have to respond to kernel
BUG()'s. If som
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > and anyway, it doesn't have to be unique;
> > > set_task_comm just does a strlcpy from the name, so it will be truncated
> > > (same as for a binary with > 15 character name).
> >
> > Yup.
On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:37 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > and anyway, it doesn't have to be unique;
> > set_task_comm just does a strlcpy from the name, so it will be truncated
> > (same as for a binary with > 15 character name).
>
> Yup. But it'd be fairly silly to go adding the /%d, only to h
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > yeah ... cannot remember why i have done it originally :-|
>
> > Might it be to do with sizeof(task_struct.comm)?
>
> But that's 16 bytes not 10;
On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > yeah ... cannot remember why i have done it originally :-|
> Might it be to do with sizeof(task_struct.comm)?
But that's 16 bytes not 10; and anyway, it doesn't have to be unique;
set_task_comm ju
Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> yeah ... cannot remember why i have done it originally :-|
>
Might it be to do with sizeof(task_struct.comm)?
>
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> > Ingo,
> >
> > This has been in the workqueue code in day one, for no real reason th
yeah ... cannot remember why i have done it originally :-|
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ingo
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
> Ingo,
>
> This has been in the workqueue code in day one, for no real reason that
> I can see. We just tripped over it in SCSI becau
10 matches
Mail list logo
