RE: Disk naming (Was Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Guestbootloadersupport [1/2])

["Ian Pratt" <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Keeping it working in the short-term while people want to do 
> this might be reasonable, but if they're doing the Right (tm) 
> thing and mounting by label or uuid, it doesn't matter what 
> the device is.  And I think that medium term, there are going 
> to be plenty of other changes needed for going from a native 
> system to an unprivileged guests.  

You'd be surprised -- I do this quite frequently, and although you get a
lot of grumbles during the boot scripts, it does just work.

> http://www.lanana.org/docs/device-list/instructions.txt has 
> the instructions.  I can volunteer to send the information 
> upstream.  It looks like using xd is already going to be a 
> namespace conflict with the ooollldddd IDE devices, though.  
> What if we go with vbd for the device names?  Then the questions are

Is the fact that it's 3 chars rather than 2 going to cause problems?
vda1 ?

> a) How many minors per disk device?  This dictates number of 
> partitions.
> It's probably reasonable to just do 15 like SCSI (especially 
> as more can then be handled dynamically for 2.6)

15 sounds fine.

> b) How many vbds do we want to have static majors for?  16 is 
> probably reasonable and this then means that we only take up 
> a single block minor.

Yep.


Ian

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel