Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755285AbYLVSzA (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:55:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751590AbYLVSyw (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:54:52 -0500 Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.142.188]:51454 "EHLO ti-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751485AbYLVSyv (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:54:51 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=MuIU0qUJClJwDYKnGv/RjN2ECMFvYCoyOTcA4jSpMKIZlrLVWOl7UkgLz22hN8jhUT XYHEGoE6YXKhXkRJ1MomNLNHNunBM+t4hazRpWKS2OTakmuC8meA6Cx9tjDQDdUZIw7/ 65UM6Ncayj4h0npw9EF7Nddp4zYo9mJsNtZt4= Message-ID: <37d33d830812221054w78fe49f3l6c2896a27c908656@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:24:49 +0530 From: "Sandeep K Sinha" To: "Sandeep K Sinha" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: Device mapper support for more than one target ? In-Reply-To: <20081222185033.GA17119@agk.fab.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <37d33d830812220922l5a0bc36et5dd1f9853f9cd33@mail.gmail.com> <20081222185033.GA17119@agk.fab.redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1502 Lines: 46 Hey, On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 12:20 AM, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 10:52:08PM +0530, Sandeep K Sinha wrote: >> After looking at the complete implementation of device mappers, I >> figured out that we can have more than one target for a mapped device >> then why do we have a check for the number of target to be equal to >> one , in dm_blk_ioctl ( ) in drivers/md/dm.c >> >> http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.27.10/drivers/md/dm.c#L337 > > Because whether or not it makes sense to send any specific ioctl to more > than one target in parallel depends on what that ioctl does. When we > added that code we said that we could add hard-coding for specific > ioctls if the need arose, but so far it hasn't. > No, the philosophy should be that we send the ioctl's to the mapped device and not to the targets underlying that mapped-device. And doing so, I should be able to access the complete map that belongs to that mapped device. If I implement an ioctl of my own and try to serve it, the problem would be that it would never allow me to serve it if has more than one target. > Alasdair > -- > agk@redhat.com > -- Regards, Sandeep. "To learn is to change. Education is a process that changes the learner." -- 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/