Hi,
Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> This patch needs splitting up so that independent changes can be
> considered separately.
>
> c.f. The proposal from Mike Anderson (repeated below) which I prefer
> because it makes it clear that a table always belongs to exactly one md.
I like his proposed patch.
The interface is useful for my purpose too and moving table
creation inside _hash_lock means I don't need dm_get() neither.
Is it going to be pushed to upstream?
I'll remake my patch based on it.
--
Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Solutions (America), Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]