[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120223130106.8d976093.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:01:06 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Cc: dave@....org, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: new procfs lockinfo
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:38:27 -0800
ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Davidlohr Bueso <dave@....org> writes:
>
> > From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@....org>
> >
> > Based on our previous discussion https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/10/462 we came to
> > agree on deprecating the current /proc/locks in favor of a more extensible interface.
> > The new /proc/lockinfo file exports similar information - except instead of maj:min the
> > device name is shown - and entries are formated like those in /proc/cpuinfo, allowing us
> > to add new entries without breaking userspace.
>
> You can't know the device name, attempt to say what you don't know seems
> very dangerous. It may be reasonable to simply give the deivce number
> and not split the device number into major/minor any more and I am
> concerned about reality.
I don't think we've ever been told any *reason* for switching from
major:minor to device-name. This is a problem.
And yes, major:minor reliably and uniquely identifies the device. I'm
not sure that the human-readable string which is largely a convenience
thing is as reliable as this.
--
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