From: Luca Berra <bluca@comedia.it>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: patches for mdadm 1.8.0 (auto=dev and stacking of devices)
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:14:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050123191415.GF15317@percy.comedia.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5d8dc2-utu.ln1@news.it.uc3m.es>
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 07:52:53PM +0100, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>Luca Berra <bluca@comedia.it> wrote:
>> I believe the correct solution to this would be implementing a char-misc
<snip>
>Making special device files "on demand" requires the cooperation of the
>driver and devfs (and since udev apparently replaces devfs, udev). One
>would need to add the code to the driver.
devfs just created 256 /dev/md/<minor> entries, and that was obnoxyous,
besides now we have mdp devices, and one of the aims of udev was
avoiding /dev pollution with un-needed nodes.
>> >BTW, is there a real need to do that? In theory, one might just
>> >create the necessary /dev/md1 from within startup script...
>> I would have done it in a script if --auto was not implemented, the
>> changes to have auto=dev are not big, mostly man page and indenting.
>
>I'm not sure I follow that. If I understand you, --auto was what you
>added to mdadm to make the special device files.
nope,
--auto was added by Neil some time ago, it is mostly needed for mdp
devices, i just added the "dev" option to --auto.
>Personally I would prefer there to be no unannounced making of device
>files, but yours is an extra flag so it does no harm in that sense.
>However, I think it is a mistaken addition. You can see that by asking
>yourself why EVERY control utility does not have that option in it.
>Hdparm? Fdisk?
>
>The answer is: because it's (a) silly, (b) none of its business. And
>the same applies here. If the sysadmin does not want a dev file, then
>let him be. If he wants one, let him make it.
you should have told Neil back then.
>However, as a matter of convenience, I would prefer that the driver
>made the devices in /dev or /sys or wherever if it can. I don't recall
>if the code is there or not!
yes, but then you would need the char device trick.
>Is there a udev document anywhere? I searched in 2.6.8.1 and found
>nothing (I won't burden you with the details of my obviously too
>cursory search).
>
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/hotplug
L.
--
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
X AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-23 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-23 15:13 patches for mdadm 1.8.0 (auto=dev and stacking of devices) Luca Berra
2005-01-23 15:28 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-01-23 16:13 ` Peter T. Breuer
2005-01-23 16:46 ` Michael Tokarev
2005-01-23 17:00 ` Luca Berra
2005-01-23 18:52 ` Peter T. Breuer
2005-01-23 19:14 ` Luca Berra [this message]
2005-01-23 20:27 ` Peter T. Breuer
2005-01-24 5:06 ` Neil Brown
2005-01-24 9:38 ` Luca Berra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050123191415.GF15317@percy.comedia.it \
--to=bluca@comedia.it \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.