Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1495719
| From | Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events |
| Date | 2016-10-05 09:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <soOlj-5DW-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <soh61-z2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <sosEa-83A-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <soHtv-100-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <soIzf-1Gt-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 01:40:05AM +0100, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 04:39:28PM -0700, Andy Grover wrote: > > devicemapper is using uevents for: > > a. dm-verity detected corruption > > b. dm-multipath: path failed or reinstated > > c. dm device renamed > > d. there's also some use in md and bcache. > > > > devicemapper uses DM_EVENT ioctl (yuck) for: > > 1. dm-thin pool data/metadata filling up (hit a threshold) > > 2. dm-cache is now clean > > 3. dm-log flushed or log failed > > 4. dm-raid error detected or sync complete > > > there doesn't seem to be much technical differentiation between the > > two lists. > > The distinction in dm is that events in the first category may affect > the availability of the device: they represent major (and hopefully > rare) changes. > > Events in the second category are just notifications: no impact on /dev, > no need to trigger udev rules, and their use will continue to be > extended, and (rarely at the moment) could be frequent (which is no > problem for the existing polling-based mechanism). > > > Instead of using uevent for everything, we could go to a separate > > genetlink for 1-4 instead of making them use uevent like a-d, but we'd > > end up with two different userspace notification techniques. > > 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? greg k-h
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-03 21:30 +0200
[PATCH 4/9] dm: Update dm-uevent.txt Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-03 21:30 +0200
[PATCH 7/9] dm: Implement dm_uevent_add() Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-03 21:30 +0200
[PATCH 9/9] dm: Generate uevents for other targets Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-03 21:30 +0200
[PATCH 3/9] dm: Inline dm_build_path_uevent into dm_path_uevent Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-03 21:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-10-04 09:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-05 01:40 +0200
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com> - 2016-10-05 02:50 +0200
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> - 2016-10-05 08:30 +0200
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-10-05 09:00 +0200
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-05 19:10 +0200
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com> - 2016-10-05 19:50 +0200
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Generate uevents for all DM events Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com> - 2016-10-06 00:40 +0200
csiph-web