[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] linux-next - WARNING: at fs/block_dev.c:824 bd_link_disk_holder+0x92/0x1ac()
- From: Milan Broz <mbroz redhat com>
- To: Tejun Heo <tj kernel org>
- Cc: Valdis Kletnieks vt edu, linux-kernel vger kernel org, linux-raid vger kernel org, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, device-mapper development <dm-devel redhat com>, Karel Zak <kzak redhat com>, Alexander Viro <viro zeniv linux org uk>, Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura ce jp nec com>
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] linux-next - WARNING: at fs/block_dev.c:824 bd_link_disk_holder+0x92/0x1ac()
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 15:25:46 +0100
On 01/13/2011 03:11 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> So, as a general rule, when in doubt, just create an attribute. Let's
> refrain from custom symlinkery in sysfs, please. In this case too, a
> holder attribute containing strings like ext[3|4], md, dm or whatnot
> would have been _much_ simpler and actually more useful.
Maybe, but this was not invented in DM/MD camp:-)
Probably Kay or Greg can answer why it was done this way?
For DM it just added links to be proper user of it, see
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=f165921df46a977e3561f1bd9f13a348441486d1
Anyway, it is /sys/block - so it represents block devices.
If btrfs internally creates some virtual _block_ device for its pool, it should
present it here too with slaves/holders. If not, why it should create any links there?
Milan
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]