On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 01:46:20PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > Something like the following might already be enough (IT'S A DRAFT, AND > UNTESTED, AND PROBABLY BROKEN)? It's probably the right thing conceptually, but it will also need the SB_I_RETIRED from test_bdev_super_fc or even just reuse test_bdev_super_fc after that's been renamed to be more generic. In fact I've been wondering for a while why we even support the magic keyed get_super - if it allocates a new super it should also have a new dev_t. So IMHO we should stop playing stupid tricks with keys and just declare the dev_t the key after doing all the required work for it, that is allocating the per-instance anon dev_t in the caller.
