Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 06:58:16 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: luigi@FreeBSD.org, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>, Ivan Voras <ivoras@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: adding 'proxy' nodes to provider ports (with patch) Message-ID: <42618.1237791496@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 23 Mar 2009 07:03:25 %2B0100." <20090323060325.GN3102@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20090323060325.GN3102@garage.freebsd.pl>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek write s: >There is still a naming problem. pp and new_pp will end up with the same >name. I'd suggest instructing GEOM to expose only parent in /dev/. who said the new provider had to have same name ? >The taste is still going to be send on new class arrival and on the last >pp write close. We decide that. Since we are inserting in an already open path, I think it makes very good sense to supress tasting, at least until close. -- 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?42618.1237791496>