From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: [RFC 5/9] SQUASHME: prd: Last fixes for partitions Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 13:05:47 +0300 Message-ID: <53F5C47B.5090800@gmail.com> References: <53EB5536.8020702@gmail.com> <53EB5709.4090401@plexistor.com> <1408575780.26863.21.camel@rzwisler-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, Matthew Wilcox , Sagi Manole , Yigal Korman To: Ross Zwisler , Boaz Harrosh Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f50.google.com ([74.125.82.50]:52094 "EHLO mail-wg0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754149AbaHUKFv (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 06:05:51 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id n12so8762617wgh.21 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 03:05:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1408575780.26863.21.camel@rzwisler-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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 "); >> 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