From: Luca Berra <bluca@comedia.it>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: patches for mdadm 1.8.0 (auto=dev and stacking of devices)
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:14:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050123191415.GF15317@percy.comedia.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5d8dc2-utu.ln1@news.it.uc3m.es>
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 07:52:53PM +0100, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>Luca Berra <bluca@comedia.it> wrote:
>> I believe the correct solution to this would be implementing a char-misc
<snip>
>Making special device files "on demand" requires the cooperation of the
>driver and devfs (and since udev apparently replaces devfs, udev). One
>would need to add the code to the driver.
devfs just created 256 /dev/md/<minor> entries, and that was obnoxyous,
besides now we have mdp devices, and one of the aims of udev was
avoiding /dev pollution with un-needed nodes.
>> >BTW, is there a real need to do that? In theory, one might just
>> >create the necessary /dev/md1 from within startup script...
>> I would have done it in a script if --auto was not implemented, the
>> changes to have auto=dev are not big, mostly man page and indenting.
>
>I'm not sure I follow that. If I understand you, --auto was what you
>added to mdadm to make the special device files.
nope,
--auto was added by Neil some time ago, it is mostly needed for mdp
devices, i just added the "dev" option to --auto.
>Personally I would prefer there to be no unannounced making of device
>files, but yours is an extra flag so it does no harm in that sense.
>However, I think it is a mistaken addition. You can see that by asking
>yourself why EVERY control utility does not have that option in it.
>Hdparm? Fdisk?
>
>The answer is: because it's (a) silly, (b) none of its business. And
>the same applies here. If the sysadmin does not want a dev file, then
>let him be. If he wants one, let him make it.
you should have told Neil back then.
>However, as a matter of convenience, I would prefer that the driver
>made the devices in /dev or /sys or wherever if it can. I don't recall
>if the code is there or not!
yes, but then you would need the char device trick.
>Is there a udev document anywhere? I searched in 2.6.8.1 and found
>nothing (I won't burden you with the details of my obviously too
>cursory search).
>
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/hotplug
L.
--
Luca Berra -- bluca@comedia.it
Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
X AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-23 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-23 15:13 patches for mdadm 1.8.0 (auto=dev and stacking of devices) Luca Berra
2005-01-23 15:28 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-01-23 16:13 ` Peter T. Breuer
2005-01-23 16:46 ` Michael Tokarev
2005-01-23 17:00 ` Luca Berra
2005-01-23 18:52 ` Peter T. Breuer
2005-01-23 19:14 ` Luca Berra [this message]
2005-01-23 20:27 ` Peter T. Breuer
2005-01-24 5:06 ` Neil Brown
2005-01-24 9:38 ` Luca Berra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050123191415.GF15317@percy.comedia.it \
--to=bluca@comedia.it \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).