Hello,
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 04:04:00PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 04:52:58PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> > > +static inline bool blkg_print_dev_name(struct seq_file *sf,
> > > + struct blkcg_gq *blkg)
> > > +{
> > > + struct gendisk *disk = blkg->q->disk;
> > > +
> > > + if (!disk)
> > > + return false;
> > > +
> > > + seq_printf(sf, "%u:%u", disk->major, disk->first_minor);
> > > + return true;
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > I wonder whether we just should add a name field to disk.
>
> And suggestions on this set now? I guess add a name filed is not
> appropriate. :(
Yeah, I don't know. I've always struggled a bit with block device names. We
use MAJ:MIN in all the input interfaces and mix the disk names and MAJ:MIN
when outputting and there are (or is it used to be now?) request_queues
without disk attached, so sometimes names are just not available.
Jens, do you any preference here? The proposed patch can be fine but e.g. it
can race against disk_release() if the caller isn't careful and it also
sucks not knowing the name in destruction path.
Thanks.
--
tejun
