Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 May 2003 17:33:07 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: Device-mapper filesystem interface |
| |
On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 09:50:36AM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote: > I thought I'd kick off a thread concerning the filesystem interface > for device-mapper after it came up on last nights 'must-fix' meeting. > > To recap: > > Alasdair Kergon and I spent a lot of time thinking last autumn about > how to best map the dm semantics onto an fs. The end result was this > very rough and ready patchset: > > http://people.sistina.com/~thornber/patches/2.5-unstable/2.5.51/2.5.51-dmfs-1.tar.bz2 > > The reception was not favourable. People didn't like the way creating > a directory was analagous to creating a device, or the fact that these > device directories were pre-populated with table, status and > dependency files. Gregkh was the only person who put forward > alternatives ideas (sysfs), and I don't think even he had thought > through how all of the dm functionality was going to be mapped. eg, > with dmfs as it stands the 'wait for event' ioctl has translated into > a poll on the status file, ie wait until the status file changes - I > think this is neat.
Yeah, I went down the sysfs path for a while, then got distracted by other issues (driver core, etc.) If you need this feature, then yes, a dmfs does make sense to have, and not use sysfs.
I'm not opposed to your implementation, it was just a bit strange at first glance. Care to update your old patch for this?
thanks,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |