[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0afb2645-59e5-f9a6-ca1f-29aaadf59400@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:06:41 -0700
From: Andy Grover <agrover@...hat.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, snitzer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events
On 10/04/2016 11:51 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 01:40:05AM +0100, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
>> We see these as two different categories of notifications, and prefer
>> the greater flexibility a mechanism independent of uevents would
>> provide. The team has discussed several alternatives over the years but
>> didn't make a decision as we've not yet reached a point where we're
>> straining the existing mechanism too far.
>
> So, no changes need to be made? I'm confused here, who is wanting this
> changed?
Hehe, Alasdair and I are both RH but working on different projects.
We're not the Borg :)
My project *would* like this added sooner, so I'll work on a revised
patchset that uses netlink instead of uevents, and will also work on a
revision to uevents.txt that talks about KOBJ_CHANGE and when it should
and should not be used, as described by agk, to help out the next person.
Thanks -- Regards -- Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists