Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 5 Aug 2013 17:22:48 +0200
From:      Luca Ferrari <fluca1978@infinito.it>
To:        freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [PROPOSAL] GEOM probing/tasting firewall
Message-ID:  <CAKoxK%2B6Jwc-4VaiDmBqd_=-1Ur5FbFqNVWSU8okyfA3pZJ3Yfg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130802190431.GH5771@garage.freebsd.pl>
References:  <447183917.20130731130956@serebryakov.spb.ru> <51F91FAC.60905@freebsd.org> <20130802190431.GH5771@garage.freebsd.pl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Another idea is to implement lazy device creation in /dev/ - when
> provider is created with this don't-taste flag its corresponding /dev/
> entry is not created, because the DEV GEOM class didn't taste it.
> But DEV class could respond to devfs lookups by trying to find provider
> by name (there is function for that already) and when found, create
> /dev/ entry for it. This would make providers that don't like to be
> tasted still available through /dev/.
>

Sounds rationale to me and less expensive that a complete rule system
(even if less flexible, but for what I read this should suffice in
many cases).

Luca



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKoxK%2B6Jwc-4VaiDmBqd_=-1Ur5FbFqNVWSU8okyfA3pZJ3Yfg>