From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 05:37:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 05:37:19 -0400 Received: from fe100.worldonline.dk ([212.54.64.211]:36367 "HELO fe100.worldonline.dk") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 05:37:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:37:12 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Joe Thornber Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A possible direction for the next LVM driver Message-ID: <20010831113712.L2855@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010830164547.A807@btconnect.com> <20010831112020.K2855@suse.de> <20010831103541.A440@btconnect.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010831103541.A440@btconnect.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 31 2001, Joe Thornber wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 11:20:20AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 30 2001, Joe Thornber wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm working on the next iteration of the LVM driver, specifically > > > trying to address the critism directed at the rather ugly ioctl > > > interface. The code has reached the stage where it works and it's > > > possible to see what I'm aiming for. I would appreciate it if people > > > could spare the time to review this and give me feedback. If there is > > > general agreement that this is moving in the right direction then the > > > next major version of LVM may be based around a future version of this > > > driver. Please CC me in replies. The code can be found at: > > > > > > ftp://ftp.sistina.com/pub/LVM2/device-mapper/device-mapper.tar.bz2 > > > > Looks interesting, here's patch to fix possible infinite loop in your > > make_request_fn. > > Great, thanks. I missed a '}', jfyi > > Another quick note -- you might want to consider > > slab'ifying the io_hook allocation/deallocation... > > yes, I'd thought of this, hence the comment ... > > /* FIXME: These should have their own slab */ > inline static struct io_hook *alloc_io_hook(void) > > I'll change that now. Oh, didn't spot that... But yet, it's a really good idea. -- Jens Axboe