> I'm not going to take this patch. It isn't the proper way to handle > preventing use of a DM device. Can you suggest a better mechanism that would be acceptable from your perspective? > In addition, the patch's header doesn't speak to a proper > review/audit of implications this change would have > on all aspects of a DM device's capabilities. I would gladly clarify the commit message, and I am sorry for making it terse in the beginning. Can you please clarify, what capabilities are you concerned about? The change shouldn't change any existing semantics if the mechanism is never used on a specific system, and only alters "open" behaviour in the cases where the specific message was issued, but I am happy to cover any additional aspects you are concerned about Thanks, Daniil -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
