Re: /dev/dm-0
Luca Berra <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ataraid |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 12:24:56PM +0200, Luca Berra wrote: >On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 04:21:39PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote: >>On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 10:55 -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: >>>I have /dev/mapper/via_hfciifae as the base raid device, and partitions >>>on the device with a number appended to the above. I believe that the >>>dmraid utility creates devices with this style of name, and if you are >>>seeing /dev/dm-0 it is because udev is creating that node because as far >>>as the kernel knows, the name of the device ( as exported by sysfs ) is >>>"dm-0". Udev probably shouldn't be creating device nodes for device >>>mapper devices, but if it does, you can simply ignore them. >> >>Well, really we should fix the kernel, and make these /dev/dm-$DMNAME >>(and thus /sys/block/dm-$DMNAME ) > >maybe mapper/$DMNAME (and thus /sys/block/mapper!$DMNAME) so we are >consistent with other drivers and udev will use /dev/mapper/$DMNAME > >this should be fairly easy to change, >just add a name parameter to > >dm_create(), dm_create_with_minor(), create_aux and alloc_dev() in >drivers/md/dm.c > >and use that parameter instead of "dm-%s" when setting disk_name just >before add_disk in alloc_dev() > >then pass param->name as the name parameter to dm_createXXXXX() in >drivers/md/dm-ioctl.c:dev_create() > >if there are no objections i might even be tempted to send a patch. > oh, yes, we would also need to plug into the rename ioctl. but i am not sure how this should be done. i don't feel like unregister_blkdev and add again is a good idea. L. -- Luca Berra -- [email protected] Communication Media & Services S.r.l. /"\ \ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN X AGAINST HTML MAIL / \