On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 03:52:55PM -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 03:16:50PM +0000, Martin Wilck wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 16:03 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > > > > AFAICS, this function has been in libdm since 1.02.111. We support > > 1.02.89 (if all features enabled, otherwise even older). Perhaps we > > should make this function call conditional on the libdm verson? > > > > But perhaps more importantly, why do we still need to call > > dm_lib_release()? AFAICS it's only needed for systems that have no udev > > support for creating device nodes (to call update_devs() via > > dm_lib_release()), and we don't support that anymore anyway, do we? > > > > Since 26c4bb0, we're always setting the > > DM_UDEV_DISABLE_LIBRARY_FALLBACK flag, and the cookie, too > > (we aren't setting it for DM_DEVICE_RELOAD, but it isn't needed for > > that, either, since no device nodes need to be created or removed); so > > dm_lib_release() should really have no effect. > > > > Regards > > Martin > > Good call. I'll redo this patch. Actually, I've changed my mind. Calling dm_lib_release() lets us release the memory that device-mapper uses to store all the node ops that it was saving up. Without calling dm_lib_release(), AFAICS, that memory keeps growing until the daemon exits. -Ben > -Ben > > > > > -- > > Dr. Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107 > > SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH > > HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg GF: Felix > > Imendörffer > > > > -- > dm-devel mailing list > dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
