loop device

Pete Graner pgraner at canonical.com
Mon Sep 7 09:57:57 UTC 2009


Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
> Sorry, I meant nobody had stated the reasons for compiling the loop
> device into the kernel. Or was that the reason to compile it in rather
> than the reason to not compile it in?

It was done primarily as an effort to link in all common modules across 
all kernels. It was perhaps an oversight since increasing loop devs is a 
real need.

Can you open a new bug with this request and post the number back here 
to the list. Thanks.

Tim thoughts?

~pete

> 
> 2009/9/7 Pete Graner <pgraner at canonical.com>:
>> Eugene Gorodinsky wrote:
>>> Since nobody answered, I guess there's no reason for it. Is it
>>> possible then to change the option "CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP=y" to
>>> "CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP=m"? This allows to enable loop device partitions
>>> (by setting the max_part option, which doesn't work when the module is
>>> compiled in) as well as change the number of loop devices. I wanted to
>>> submit a patch, but apparently the configs are generated
>>> automatically, so I'm not really sure how to do that.
>> It was answered on list on the 2nd:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2009-September/007152.html
>>
>> ~pete
>> --
>> Pete Graner             <pgraner at canonical.com>
>> Manager
>> Ubuntu Kernel Team
>> Canonical Ltd.          http://www.canonical.com/
>>


-- 
Pete Graner		<pgraner at canonical.com>
Manager			
Ubuntu Kernel Team	
Canonical Ltd.		http://www.canonical.com/




More information about the kernel-team mailing list