From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756535Ab3D2PSq (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:18:46 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64175 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752123Ab3D2PSp (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:18:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:17:19 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: Tejun Heo , scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com, axboe@kernel.dk, neilb@suse.de, hch@infradead.org, jmoyer@redhat.com, stephenmcameron@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] block: Add new generic block device naming interface Message-ID: <20130429151719.GG8204@redhat.com> References: <20130425202215.20557.75283.stgit@beardog.cce.hp.com> <20130425204033.GB10990@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130425210726.GL7917@beardog.cce.hp.com> <20130425211459.GC10990@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130425221220.GM7917@beardog.cce.hp.com> <20130426190327.GC1433@mtj.dyndns.org> <517E8A26.7060705@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <517E8A26.7060705@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 04:56:38PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 04/26/2013 09:03 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > > hey, > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 05:12:20PM -0500, scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com wrote: > >> It looks like these are called from a function called init_device_map() > >> that is called from grub_stage2() at least in the version of grub I looked > >> at (0.97, from rhel6). > >> > >> So my assumption is that adding a new block driver with yet another name space > >> would require adding another bit of code into grub like those above. When I > >> asked about "best practices" for new block driver device names on the grub devel > >> mailing list to minimize required changes to grub, nobody argued against that > >> assumption. > > > > I think we kinda need to get down to the root cause of the issue. > > Nothing against giving common names to devices in itself but there's a > > non-insigificant chance that we end up with something half-way if the > > original problem isn't properly understodd. > > > Oh, the problem _is_ well understood. > > It's the design of grub :-) > > grub requires you to re-implement _every_ device naming scheme which > is present in the kernel. So then grub needs to be fixed and not the other way around? Thanks Vivek