On Fri, Jan 10 2014 at 5:42am -0500, Joe Thornber <thornber@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:32:59AM +0000, Joe Thornber wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 03:28:13PM -0600, Brassow Jonathan wrote: > > > Yes, that'd be nice if we could have this. > > Also, don't be fooled into thinking these changes will make your life > easier. LVM will still have to support the current kernel interface. LVM could easily require dm-cache >= 1.3. Just because dm-cache was available with earlier versions doesn't mean LVM _must_ support it. dm-cache is EXPERIMENTAL, by definition it is subject to change. One of the big causes for change (as unfortunate as such changes are) is when prominent tools like lvm2 finally get around to providing support.. when that support is designed/implemented it can expose oversights in the initial userspace interface provided by the kernel. There is no hard rule that EXPERIMENTAL dm targets must be supported by lvm2 and conversely there is no requirement that such dm targets provide an interface that is backwards compatible. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
