On Thu, 2013-10-17 at 17:13 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > Cannot say that argument wins me over but I will say that if you intend > to take the approach to have the kernel have a timeout; please pursue > the approach Hannes offered: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2953231/ > > It is much cleaner and if it works for your needs we can see about > getting a tested version upstream. Unfortunately his patch doesn't work as-is; it turns out that it tries to set the timeout only if the target is request-based but at the time he tries to set it the table type hasn't yet been set. I'm looking into fixing it. -- Frank Mayhar 310-460-4042 -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
