On Thu, 2004-01-01 at 07:34, Rob Landley wrote: > Fundamental problem: "Unique" depends on the other devices in the system. You > can't guarantee unique by looking at one device, more or less by definition. Of course. > Combine that with hotplug and you have a world of pain. Generating a number > from a device is just a fancy hashing function, but as soon as you have two > devices that generate the same number independently (when in separate > systems) and you plug them both into the same system: boom. A solution would have to deal with collisions. > Of course the EASY way to deal with collisions is to just fail the hash thingy > in a detectable way, and punt to some kind of udev override. So if you yank > a drive from system A, throw it in system B, try to re-export it NFS, and > it's not going to work, it TELLS you. No no no. Nothing this complicated. No punting to udev. > Solve 90% of the problem space and have a human deal with the exceptions. How > big's the unique number being exported, anyway? (If it's 32 bits, the > exceptions are 1 in 4 billion. It may never be seen in the wild...) Device numbers are 64-bit now. Rob Love - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups:
- Re: udev and devfs - The final wordAndries Brouwer
- Re: udev and devfs - The final wordAndries Brouwer
- Re: udev and devfs - The final wordRob Love
- Re: udev and devfs - The final wordRob Landley
- Prev by Date: Re: [Dri-devel] 2.6 kernel change in nopage
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.0 framebuffer Matrox
- Previous by thread: Re: udev and devfs - The final word
- Next by thread: Re: udev and devfs - The final word
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]