All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [uml-devel] uml-patch-2.4.20-7
       [not found] ` <3F512995.4050209@vgertech.com>
@ 2003-09-02 19:00   ` Jeff Dike
  2003-09-03 15:45     ` Matt Zimmerman
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Dike @ 2003-09-02 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Nuno Silva; +Cc: user-mode-linux-devel

nuno.silva@vgertech.com said:
> Can you give us a brief explanation on what this does? :) 

It's not useful at the moment.

It's to support the standalone COW driver when I get around to finishing it.
You will set up a COW file on the command line like
	cow0=/dev/ubd1,/dev/ubd0 ubd0=backing-file ubd1=cow-file

Since I can't break the existing
	ubdx=cow-file,backing-file
syntax, that will need to continue to be supported.

This causes a problem with ubd1=cow-file in the first example.  As the ubd
driver is currently written, this will cause ubd1 to be effectively
	ubd1=cow-file,backing-file
because it will read the backing file from the COW header.

With the standalone COW driver, this is undesirable.  We want ubd1 to not
be interpretted as a COW file since cow0 will be doing that.

So, the best thing I could think of was to make you specify ubd1 as
	ubd1d=cow-file
which says 'this is just blocks of data, even though it looks like a COW file'.

This is non-optimal since the common case in the long run (standalone COW)
should be easy and not require any special extra crap, but I don't see a
way of doing that without breaking everyone's scripts.

				Jeff



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [uml-devel] uml-patch-2.4.20-7
  2003-09-02 19:00   ` [uml-devel] uml-patch-2.4.20-7 Jeff Dike
@ 2003-09-03 15:45     ` Matt Zimmerman
  2003-09-04  2:30       ` Jeff Dike
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matt Zimmerman @ 2003-09-03 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: user-mode-linux-devel

On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 03:00:34PM -0400, Jeff Dike wrote:

> Since I can't break the existing
> 	ubdx=cow-file,backing-file
> syntax, that will need to continue to be supported.

Maybe it wouldn't be so bad to break the existing
    ubdx=cow-file
syntax, though?

-- 
 - mdz


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [uml-devel] uml-patch-2.4.20-7
  2003-09-03 15:45     ` Matt Zimmerman
@ 2003-09-04  2:30       ` Jeff Dike
  2003-09-04  3:15         ` Matt Zimmerman
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Dike @ 2003-09-04  2:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matt Zimmerman; +Cc: user-mode-linux-devel

mdz@debian.org said:
> Maybe it wouldn't be so bad to break the existing
>     ubdx=cow-file 
> syntax, though?

Dunno, how do I go about figuring out how bad that is?

				Jeff



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [uml-devel] uml-patch-2.4.20-7
  2003-09-04  2:30       ` Jeff Dike
@ 2003-09-04  3:15         ` Matt Zimmerman
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Matt Zimmerman @ 2003-09-04  3:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: user-mode-linux-devel

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 10:30:11PM -0400, Jeff Dike wrote:

> mdz@debian.org said:
> > Maybe it wouldn't be so bad to break the existing
> >     ubdx=cow-file 
> > syntax, though?
> 
> Dunno, how do I go about figuring out how bad that is?

Float it on the mailing list, I guess...

*waits*

I don't hear any screaming so far. :-)

(I don't use that syntax, personally)

-- 
 - mdz


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-09-04  3:15 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <200308071929.h77JTo5N017958@uml.karaya.com>
     [not found] ` <3F512995.4050209@vgertech.com>
2003-09-02 19:00   ` [uml-devel] uml-patch-2.4.20-7 Jeff Dike
2003-09-03 15:45     ` Matt Zimmerman
2003-09-04  2:30       ` Jeff Dike
2003-09-04  3:15         ` Matt Zimmerman

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.