From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 16 14:17:42 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD28106566B;
	Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:17:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jh@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi
	[195.197.172.115])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F30E8FC1D;
	Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:17:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from a91-153-117-195.elisa-laajakaista.fi
	(a91-153-117-195.elisa-laajakaista.fi [91.153.117.195])
	by gw01.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with SMTP id AC91815153D;
	Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:17:38 +0200 (EET)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:17:38 +0200
From: Jaakko Heinonen <jh@FreeBSD.org>
To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20100316141737.GB3010@a91-153-117-195.elisa-laajakaista.fi>
References: <20100315195059.GA1331@a91-153-117-195.elisa-laajakaista.fi>
	<20100316000133.GC3574@garage.freebsd.pl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100316000133.GC3574@garage.freebsd.pl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: geom_label and directories under /dev
X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations
	<freebsd-geom.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom>,
	<mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-geom>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-geom@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-geom>,
	<mailto:freebsd-geom-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:17:42 -0000


Thanks for your reply.

On 2010-03-16, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> What you described are bugs in devfs that should be fixed in devfs and
> not worked around by limiting GEOM flexibility.

I don't disagree in general.

> Devfs allows to create multiple entiries with the same name and this
> is bug, file system shouldn't allow that.

I am not a devfs expert but the current make_dev(9) interface suggest
that it's responsibility of the caller to ensure sanity of device names.
make_dev(9) can't fail AFAIK, so fixing it seems to require writing a
new interface for devfs. Also, changes in GEOM may be needed because
g_dev_taste() isn't prepared to handle make_dev() failures.

-- 
Jaakko