Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 15:20:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 15:20:37 -0400 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:32142 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 15:20:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 15:26:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Alexander Viro To: Linus Torvalds cc: Patrick Mochel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [bk/patch] driver model update: device_unregister() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1058 Lines: 30 On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > In other words, if you think that it is reasonable to have an assocation > from the MD device to the list of partitions that are part of that MD > device, then you _need_ to have a "partition node", because otherwise you > cannot have the pointer to it. See? > > So your "partition side" vs "filesystem side" thing doesn't matter. It > doesn't matter which side the associations are, you need to have a node to > associate _with_. > > Noth sides need a node. Even if the relationship is only going in one > direction. *eeek* Even aside of the problems with putting filesystems (and filesystem types) into driverfs (can_unload() for each fs module?), partitions _ARE_ reused. So logics with ->release() will be a killer. Do you really want to do that? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/