lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [dm-devel] Re: [RFC] device-mapper ioctl interface
Date
On Thursday 05 June 2003 12:00, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Thursday 05 June 2003 18:47, Kevin Corry wrote:
> > 2) Removing suspended devices. The current code (2.5.70) does not allow a
> > suspended device to be removed/unlinked from the ioctl interface, since
> > removing it would leave you with no way to resume it (and hence flush any
> > pending I/Os). Alasdair mentioned a couple of new ideas. One would be to
> > reload the device with an error-map and force it to resume, thus erroring
> > any pending I/Os and allowing the device to be removed. This seems a bit
> > heavy-handed.
>
> Which is the heavy-handed part?

The part about automatically reloading the table with an error map and forcing
it to resume. It just seemed to me that user-space ought to be able to gather
enough information to determine that a device needed to be resumed before it
could be removed. Thus the kernel driver wouldn't be forced to implement such
a policy.

Talking with Alasadair again, he mentioned a case I hadn't considered. Devices
would now be created without a mapping and initially suspended. If some other
error occurred, and you decided to just delete the device before loading a
mapping, it would fail. And having to resume a device with no mapping just
to be able to delete it definitely seems odd.

So, it's not like I'm dead-set against this idea. I was just curious what the
reasoning was behind this change.

--
Kevin Corry
kevcorry@us.ibm.com
http://evms.sourceforge.net/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans