Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 12:42:16 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: geom@freebsd.org Subject: some comments on geom(8) Message-ID: <25148.1085049736@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
These are merely comments and not binding in any way. The idea behind the gctl_*(9) api was to avoid class specific code in userland to the extent possible and to converge on a common command set for geom classes to make life easier and more intuitive for administrators. For a simple operation like "create", I have a hard time seeing why we need class specific code in userland. I would expect to be able to type: create stripe ad0s1 ad1s1 into geom(8) and see it construct a g_ctl containing: verb "create" class "stripe" nprovider "2" provider0 "ad0s1" provider1 "ad1s1" which I would expect the geom_stripe class in the kernel to understand. If I had typed create stripe -stripe 64 ad0s1 ad1s1 It would be: verb "create" class "stripe" nprovider "2" provider0 "ad0s1" provider1 "ad1s1" stripe "64" Similar destroy foobar should examine the XML status to find the class of the "foobar" generate something like: verb "destroy" class "foo" target "foobar" But as I said: these are non-binding comments, do it which ever way makes sense to you guys. Poul-Henning -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?25148.1085049736>