linux-kernel - Re: [Lsf] [RFC] writeback and cgroup

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120416155207.GB15437@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:52:07 -0400
From:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To:	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, ctalbott@...gle.com,
	rni@...gle.com, andrea@...terlinux.com,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lsf@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, jmoyer@...hat.com, lizefan@...wei.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Lsf] [RFC] writeback and cgroup

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 09:07:07PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:

[..]
> Vivek, I noticed these lines in cfq code
> 
>                 sscanf(dev_name(bdi->dev), "%u:%u", &major, &minor);
> 
> Why not use bdi->dev->devt?  The problem is that dev_name() will
> return "btrfs-X" for btrfs rather than "major:minor".

Isn't bdi->dev->devt 0?  I see following code.

add_disk()
   bdi_register_dev()
      bdi_register()
         device_create_vargs(MKDEV(0,0))
	      dev->devt = devt = MKDEV(0,0);

So for normal block devices, I think bdi->dev->devt will be zero, that's
why probably we don't use it.

Thanks
Vivek
--
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/