From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <20021128120436.GA11436@reti> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline From: Joe Thornber Subject: [linux-lvm] dm patches for 2.5.50 Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu Nov 28 06:05:02 2002 List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-lvm@sistina.com, lvm-devel@sistina.com Cc: Alan Cox Latest dm patches for 2.5.50 are available here: http://people.sistina.com/~thornber/patches/2.5-stable/2.5.50/ - Joe Revision 1: Four constants: DM_DIR, DM_MAX_TYPE_NAME, DM_NAME_LEN, DM_UUID_LEN Were being declared in device-mapper.h, these are all specific to the ioctl interface, so they've been moved to dm-ioctl.h. Nobody in userland should ever include so remove ifdef __KERNEL guards. Revision 2: Joe, I believe Steve and I found a bug in dm-table.c. The function open_dev() has the wrong check after the call to blkdev_get(). Thus, if the blkdev_get() call succeeds, bd_claim() is never called. Futhermore, if blkdev_get() fails (for instance, if you try to create a target to a non-existent device), bd_claim() will fail, and blkdev_put() may segfault. -- Kevin Corry corryk@us.ibm.com http://evms.sourceforge.net/ ============================== Revision 3: Return -ENOTBLK if lookup_device() finds the inode, but it is not a block device. [Cristoph Hellwig] Revision 4: No need to validate the parameters if we are doing a REMOVE_ALL command. Revision 5: check_device_area was comparing the bytes with sectors. [Stefan Lauterbach]