Hello, On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Milan Broz <mbroz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Maybe, but this was not invented in DM/MD camp:-) > Probably Kay or Greg can answer why it was done this way? Let's not play the dig the history and blame game if possible. We (including me, of course) all did a lot of horrible things in the past. :-) > For DM it just added links to be proper user of it, see > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=f165921df46a977e3561f1bd9f13a348441486d1 > > Anyway, it is /sys/block - so it represents block devices. > > If btrfs internally creates some virtual _block_ device for its pool, it should > present it here too with slaves/holders. If not, why it should create any links there? Yeah, that's the most bothering part for me. The biggest customers of bd_claim are filesystems and all these custom symlinkeries don't do nothing for them. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Thanks. -- tejun -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
