On Wed, Oct 04 2017 at 2:45am -0400, Milan Broz <gmazyland@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/03/2017 11:18 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 03 2017 at 4:33pm -0400, > > Milan Broz <gmazyland@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On 10/03/2017 10:08 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > >>> > >>> It would be interesting to know, why Milan wants the table load to fail. > >> > >> I mentioned this on IRC: > >> the only situation I care about in load is that size (dm-table length) is unaligned to optional sector_size. > >> create fails in this case, load should imho fail as well. > >> ... > >> if we say that dmsetup table output is always directly usable (as a mapping table), > >> then why should there be an exception for dmsetup table --inactive? (now it can print apparently invalid mapping) > > > > The .ctr should validate the inactive table and that'll cause load to > > fail. > > And that's exactly what is the former patch doing - we introduced a new parameter that > has new limitations, we should fix constructor. That's all I want :-) Yeap, I've staged your fix.. enough with all this debate. See: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/commit/?h=for-4.14/dm&id=783874b050768d361239e444ba0fa396bb6d463f (but yes I read your "rant".. I agreed with all you said.. but it lacked the qualities of a flaming rant.. you must be happier ;) -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
