Re: [RFC 5/9] SQUASHME: prd: Last fixes for partitions

[Boaz Harrosh <openosd@gmail.com>]

On 08/21/2014 02:03 AM, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-08-13 at 15:16 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
<>
> 
> I really like where you're going with getting rid of prd_probe.  Clearly I
> just copied this from brd, but I'd love to be rid of it entirely.  Is there a
> valid way for our probe function to get called?  If not, can we just have a
> little stub with a BUG() in it to make sure we hear about it if it does ever
> get called, and delete a bunch of code?
> 
> I think this would let us get rid of pmem_probe(), pmem_init_one(), and the
> pmem_devices_mutex.
> 

You lost me, pmem_init_one() is gone already, and yes the mutex can go away
as well right now after this patch. But please lets keep it I want to add
a sysfs interface to add more devices dynamically similar to osdblk.

The only thing I want to clean is the the pmem_free + pmem_del_one it can
be reduced to just one function.

> If there *is* a valid way for this code to get called, let's figure it out so
> we can at least test this function.  This will be especially necessary as we
> add support for more pmem disks.
> 

Let me investigate this one, I think we can get rid of it for sure, by
passing NULL to register. Surly there is no use case for it now.

>>  
>> @@ -424,5 +423,7 @@ static void __exit prd_exit(void)
>>  
>>  MODULE_AUTHOR("Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>");
>>  MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>> +MODULE_ALIAS("pmem");
> 
> Let's just go with the full rename s/prd/pmem/.  That turned out to be really
> clean & made everything consistent - thanks for the good suggestion.
> 

hooray, yes thanks, this makes me very happy.

> - Ross
> 

Thanks
Boaz