[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 1/3] Send KOBJ_ADD event after dm resume ioctl.

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:27:35AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 22:35, Milan Broz <mbroz redhat com> wrote:
> > But if your statement is "it is your broken activation model" as you said
> > in some discussion, I can do nothing, just disagree - it is different model,
> > not broken.
> Sure, if you are fine with that model, I'm fine with it too. You are
> the one sending patches to mangle basic driver-core definitions to
> paper-over some issues dm seem to have with it. I just object to such
> core changes, not to the way dm is doing things.
> I have no problem with dm creating "dead" devices, it's like this
> since a long time, but please don't try to fake things in the driver
> core to make it look different from what it is. We don't want /sys and
> /dev and events to be out of sync, like non-"add"-ed devices which are
> fully created in /sys, or "remove"-d devices which are still fully
> populated in /sys.
> /sys is the direct export of kernel objects, if you create objects,
> they appear, and they get announced. If you don't want them to be
> announced at that time, just don't register them at that time.
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking you to change the current state how
> dm is doing things, I just object to the patch which inconsistently
> tries to fake events, which do not match the state in /sys.

Would introducing a KOBJ_READY_TO_BE_CONSUMED_BY_UDEV help?

Or re-using KOBJ_ONLINE for that purpose,
even though it has different meaning elsewhere?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]