From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Domsch Subject: Re: [RFCI] How best to partition MD/raid devices in 2.6 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:44:23 -0600 Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20031114154423.A5587@lists.us.dell.com> References: <16308.18387.142415.469027@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> <1068787304.4157.8.camel@localhost> <16308.26754.867801.131463@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> <20031114101647.GJ32211@marowsky-bree.de> <20031114182927.GA8810@gtf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031114182927.GA8810@gtf.org>; from jgarzik@pobox.com on Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:29:27PM -0500 To: Jeff Garzik Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids > This brings up a tangent point... partitions on top of RAID are a new > thing, which means that one has the chance to define the partition > format. > > And I kinda like EFI partition format, a lot better than the other > common ones... Any reason why the current partition-mapping code couldn't be extended to handle partition detection on a generic block device (which is what MD presents I think) instead of a struct gendisk? Then it wouldn't matter which scheme someone wanted to use - any scheme provided for in the kernel (or userspace if partx were extended) could be used. I'm partial to the EFI format too, but wouldn't want to write that code a second time, once for normal disks, and once for md. Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Sr. Software Engineer, Lead Engineer Dell Linux Solutions www.dell.com/linux Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com