From: Kevin Corry <kevcorry@us.ibm.com>
To: dm-devel@sistina.com, Daniel Phillips <dphillips@sistina.com>,
Linux Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFC] device-mapper ioctl interface
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 12:50:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200306051250.30994.kevcorry@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200306051900.37276.dphillips@sistina.com>
On Thursday 05 June 2003 12:00, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Thursday 05 June 2003 18:47, Kevin Corry wrote:
> > 2) Removing suspended devices. The current code (2.5.70) does not allow a
> > suspended device to be removed/unlinked from the ioctl interface, since
> > removing it would leave you with no way to resume it (and hence flush any
> > pending I/Os). Alasdair mentioned a couple of new ideas. One would be to
> > reload the device with an error-map and force it to resume, thus erroring
> > any pending I/Os and allowing the device to be removed. This seems a bit
> > heavy-handed.
>
> Which is the heavy-handed part?
The part about automatically reloading the table with an error map and forcing
it to resume. It just seemed to me that user-space ought to be able to gather
enough information to determine that a device needed to be resumed before it
could be removed. Thus the kernel driver wouldn't be forced to implement such
a policy.
Talking with Alasadair again, he mentioned a case I hadn't considered. Devices
would now be created without a mapping and initially suspended. If some other
error occurred, and you decided to just delete the device before loading a
mapping, it would fail. And having to resume a device with no mapping just
to be able to delete it definitely seems odd.
So, it's not like I'm dead-set against this idea. I was just curious what the
reasoning was behind this change.
--
Kevin Corry
kevcorry@us.ibm.com
http://evms.sourceforge.net/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-05 17:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-05 9:39 [RFC] device-mapper ioctl interface Joe Thornber
2003-06-05 16:47 ` Kevin Corry
2003-06-05 17:00 ` [dm-devel] " Daniel Phillips
2003-06-05 17:50 ` Kevin Corry [this message]
2003-06-05 18:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-06-05 19:41 ` Joe Thornber
2003-06-06 16:11 ` Kevin Corry
2003-06-06 17:17 ` Greg KH
2003-06-06 19:53 ` [dm-devel] " Alasdair G Kergon
2003-06-09 20:03 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-06-09 20:39 ` Greg KH
2003-06-09 21:39 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-06-09 22:08 ` Daniel Phillips
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=200306051250.30994.kevcorry@us.ibm.com \
--to=kevcorry@us.ibm.com \
--cc=dm-devel@sistina.com \
--cc=dphillips@sistina.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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