From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Ledford Subject: Re: RFC - device names and mdadm with some reference to udev. Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:13:36 -0400 Message-ID: <1225120416.4845.128.camel@firewall.xsintricity.com> References: <18692.62860.863118.727187@notabene.brown> <20081027082257.GB1801@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-/rq9adNK92CdnQAimysZ" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20081027082257.GB1801@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: martin f krafft Cc: Neil Brown , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Michal Marek , Kay Sievers List-Id: linux-raid.ids --=-/rq9adNK92CdnQAimysZ Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 09:22 +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Neil Brown [2008.10.26.2356 +0100]: > > Greeting. > > This is a Request For Comments.... >=20 > Good morning! >=20 > [...] > > I'm also wondering if I should include a udev 'rules' file for md > > in the mdadm distribution. Obviously it would be no more than > > a recommendation, but it might give me a voice in guiding how udev > > interacted with mdadm. >=20 > I would really like to have a clear separation of competencies. > Ideally, mdadm never creates any devices but leaves it all to udev, > and all configuration about alternate names ("symlinks") is done in > the udev rules file. This would then require that we have a working udev in our initrd images. It would greatly increase the complexity of early booting as a result. > I know mdadm needs the devices for the ioctls(). However, much of > what it does with ioctl should already be possible with /sys. Thus, > in my ideal world, I imagine mdadm to be a manipulator of /sys, > instructing the kernel to do stuff with components and arrays, and > have udev create and remove corresponding devices in response to > kernel events. >=20 > I realise this would require a revamp of mdadm, and might actually > be better done in a new software designed to eventually replace > mdadm. But is this a way forward with which you could befriend > yourself? >=20 --=20 Doug Ledford GPG KeyID: CFBFF194 http://people.redhat.com/dledford Infiniband specific RPMs available at http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband --=-/rq9adNK92CdnQAimysZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkkF2qAACgkQTzP9PM7pjw99dQCfTm8pZqn9UpZ1ADKXtQ8EccLG 9xAAnR8SP34gHW9so5YGohHg/Am1GIuh =89Oc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-/rq9adNK92CdnQAimysZ--