[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1315283397.19067.37.camel@sauron>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 07:29:51 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: david.wagner@...e-electrons.com,
linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI
On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 07:10 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 06:44 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > > It's not a dummy bus, in this approach it would be a the bus that gets
> > > used by all ubiblk devices, which is a very common concept by itself.
> > > It's more like the classic understanding of a 'device class' that Greg
> > > wants to see get replaced by bus_types in the kernel.
> >
> > Yes, this sounds OK. Although UBI already has notifiers, so we could
> > just add 2 more events.
>
> Hmm, with notifications the error handling becomes a problem - we want
> the ioctls for creating/removing the block device to be synchronous,
> and, should an error occur, we want to return the error code to the
> user-space. So the existing notifications mechanism does not work well.
... but we can change it a little and have error codes handling, this is
just UB implementation issues.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists