From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754995Ab1JSWGB (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:06:01 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:37418 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754958Ab1JSWF7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:05:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:05:53 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Vivek Goyal Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ctalbott@google.com, rni@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] block: fix genhd refcounting in blkio_policy_parse_and_set() Message-ID: <20111019220553.GQ25124@google.com> References: <1318998384-22525-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1318998384-22525-3-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20111019132657.GA1140@redhat.com> <20111019162902.GA25124@google.com> <20111019165932.GH1140@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111019165932.GH1140@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:59:32PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > Are you trying to tie the rules with actual presence of device. Current > model is that we just check for a valid device while somebody is > specifying the rule. After that device can go away and rule can still > be there. We are just trying to make sure that when you are putting > the rule, atleast at that time device is present. Hmmm.... I don't know. If we're gonna bind rule existence to that of device, wouldn't it be better to simply not check whether the device exists? The current behavior seems pretty confusing to me. Thanks. -- tejun