From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC6FC54FCC for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:03:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10BC206D5 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:03:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728651AbgDUPD6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:03:58 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:47161 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728316AbgDUPD6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:03:58 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id C972768C4E; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:03:54 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:03:54 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Stefan Haberland Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jan Hoeppner , Jens Axboe , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: stop using ioctl_by_bdev in the s390 DASD driver Message-ID: <20200421150354.GA10191@lst.de> References: <20200421061226.33731-1-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 04:17:53PM +0200, Stefan Haberland wrote: > I can imagine some ways to get rid of this ioctl_by_bdev. Maybe having a > udev > rule to add a partition from userspace or having the driver add the implicit > partition at the end. Or maybe something else. > > If it is OK I will have a look at this and discuss this issue with my > colleagues and come up with a different approach. Sure, we can wait a few days. Note that I don't want to break existing userspace, which kinda speaks against a udev solution.