Re: LVM 1.0 release decision

[David S. Miller]

Andrea Arcangeli writes:
 > you _must_ know very well what the mainteinance of that code means ;).

Which is why I added the facility by which such ioctl conversions can
be registered at runtime by the subsystem/driver itself.

 > BTW, it would be nice if somebody would take care of unifying the
 > large sharable parts of the emulation code between
 > x86-64/sparc64/ia64/mips64, this was mentioned by Andi several times but
 > nothing is been done in that direction yet, they for large part do the
 > same things and somehow we duplicate efforts across all those ports (if
 > we exclude the regs maniuplation in the ELF_PLAT_DATA and friends that
 > can be localized easily). If we do that kind of sharing all the other
 > ports would probably get the 32bit emulation for the lvm ioctl for free
 > from the sparc64 effort for example.

I'm already planning on doing this, but it is a 2.5.x project.
Dave Mosberger agrees with this as has anyone else I've mentioned
the idea to, so consider it basically done in 2.5.x sometime.

Later,
David S. Miller
[e-mail]