On 02/15/2011 04:50 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: >> That's why I'm arguing EACCES is not a good error to return and EROFS is >> more appropriate. > > Frankly, I don't really mind one way or the other but EROFS isn't > usually used in those areas. It might make sense for this use case > and then there will be cases it just feels awkward. This being a dm > thing, wouldn't it be just better to let dm massage the return value? It is not DM thing. That code was checking for generic block device. No DM there (it was from cryptsetup code but not related to DM part). Yes, code is not perfect but it worked for >5 years. How many userspace programs it breaks now? Milan -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
