From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 7 22:46:21 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7643416A4CE for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2005 22:46:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (pobrecita.freebsd.ru [194.87.13.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA26843D3F for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2005 22:46:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ache@nagual.pp.ru) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (ache@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nagual.pp.ru (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j37MkJGn097330; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 02:46:19 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache@nagual.pp.ru) Received: (from ache@localhost) by nagual.pp.ru (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j37MkJA7097329; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 02:46:19 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from ache) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 02:46:19 +0400 From: Andrey Chernov To: Marcel Moolenaar Message-ID: <20050407224618.GA96655@nagual.pp.ru> Mail-Followup-To: Andrey Chernov , Marcel Moolenaar , Poul-Henning Kamp , current@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20331.1112908380@critter.freebsd.dk> <440f480855b36bcc43281835e1e3781d@xcllnt.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <440f480855b36bcc43281835e1e3781d@xcllnt.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter (version: 1.1.0-3; AVE: 6.30.0.7; VDF: 6.30.0.74; host: nagual.pp.ru) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (nagual.pp.ru [0.0.0.0]); Fri, 08 Apr 2005 02:46:19 +0400 (MSD) cc: Poul-Henning Kamp cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GEOM architecture and the (lack of) need for foot-shooting X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 22:46:21 -0000 On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 03:20:33PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > Once the OS has been loaded and has obtained all the information it > cares about, the partition table is not needed anymore. Its existence I completely agree! Disk partition table is not the thing supposed to be able to affect already booted OS behaviour. When OS is booted and read disk partition table one time, it must completely forget about disk partition table and use in-core partition table only instead. Even someone fill disk partition table with zeroes, nothing should be changed. It is the way like it always works. Rules are simple as that: a) You may have in-core partition table with immediate effect and read disk partition table into it _one_time_ after boot. b) You may _write_ (sync) in-core partition table to the disk partition table when needed or at reboot. c) But you must never _read_ the disk partition table to the in-core partition table more then one time. d) You may _write_ anything to the disk partition table at any time. -- http://ache.pp.ru/