On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 09:57:30AM -0800, malahal@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Why do we need dm_get() and dm_put() in dm_copy_name_and_uuid()? > dm_copy_name_and_uuid() already has access to md and there shouldn't be > any need to hold a reference. As Mike points out, struct dm_uevent holds a reference without incrementing the ref count. dm_path_uevent() already takes a reference - can everything get simplified if we move this code there (and replace the new mutex with a spinlock of course)? Then dm_send_uevents won't need to use 'md'. Alasdair -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
