On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 22:35, Milan Broz <mbroz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But if your statement is "it is your broken activation model" as you said > in some discussion, I can do nothing, just disagree - it is different model, > not broken. Sure, if you are fine with that model, I'm fine with it too. You are the one sending patches to mangle basic driver-core definitions to paper-over some issues dm seem to have with it. I just object to such core changes, not to the way dm is doing things. I have no problem with dm creating "dead" devices, it's like this since a long time, but please don't try to fake things in the driver core to make it look different from what it is. We don't want /sys and /dev and events to be out of sync, like non-"add"-ed devices which are fully created in /sys, or "remove"-d devices which are still fully populated in /sys. /sys is the direct export of kernel objects, if you create objects, they appear, and they get announced. If you don't want them to be announced at that time, just don't register them at that time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking you to change the current state how dm is doing things, I just object to the patch which inconsistently tries to fake events, which do not match the state in /sys. Thanks, Kay -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
