All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Cc: dave@gnu.org, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: new procfs lockinfo
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:01:06 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120223130106.8d976093.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1r4xmz8n0.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:38:27 -0800
ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:

> Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org>
> >
> > Based on our previous discussion https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/10/462 we came to
> > agree on deprecating the current /proc/locks in favor of a more extensible interface.
> > The new /proc/lockinfo file exports similar information - except instead of maj:min the
> > device name is shown - and entries are formated like those in /proc/cpuinfo, allowing us
> > to add new entries without breaking userspace.
> 
> You can't know the device name, attempt to say what you don't know seems
> very dangerous.  It may be reasonable to simply give the deivce number
> and not split the device number into major/minor any more and I am
> concerned about reality.

I don't think we've ever been told any *reason* for switching from
major:minor to device-name.  This is a problem.

And yes, major:minor reliably and uniquely identifies the device.  I'm
not sure that the human-readable string which is largely a convenience
thing is as reliable as this.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2012-02-23 21:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-20 11:30 [PATCH] locks: new procfs lockinfo Davidlohr Bueso
2012-02-21 21:06 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-23  0:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-23 10:44   ` Davidlohr Bueso
2012-02-23 21:01   ` Andrew Morton [this message]

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=20120223130106.8d976093.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=dave@gnu.org \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    /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.