From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used.
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 15:35:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gcOdBmzhMoyEErwh9Q7sXmWprdYy=W-iSSj+JwT=n6YA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160309215702.20904.61407.stgit@noble>
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:59 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> wrote:
> When alloc_disk(0) is used, the ->major number is ignored and
> irrelevant. Yet several drivers register a major number anyway.
>
> This series of patches removes the pointless registrations. The pmem
> driver also does this, but a patch has already been sent for that
> driver.
>
> Note that I am not in a position to test these beyond simple compile
> testing.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>
> ---
>
> NeilBrown (4):
> nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number
> nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number
The libnvdimm unit tests were fine with these, applied.
Btw, because you mentioned it, our unit test infrastructure does not
require real hardware. See the ndctl readme [1], and if you have
copious amounts of free time the lwn write up on how we're mocking
resources [2].
[1]: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/README.md
[2]: https://lwn.net/Articles/654071/
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used.
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 15:35:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gcOdBmzhMoyEErwh9Q7sXmWprdYy=W-iSSj+JwT=n6YA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160309215702.20904.61407.stgit@noble>
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:59 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> wrote:
> When alloc_disk(0) is used, the ->major number is ignored and
> irrelevant. Yet several drivers register a major number anyway.
>
> This series of patches removes the pointless registrations. The pmem
> driver also does this, but a patch has already been sent for that
> driver.
>
> Note that I am not in a position to test these beyond simple compile
> testing.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>
> ---
>
> NeilBrown (4):
> nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number
> nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number
The libnvdimm unit tests were fine with these, applied.
Btw, because you mentioned it, our unit test infrastructure does not
require real hardware. See the ndctl readme [1], and if you have
copious amounts of free time the lwn write up on how we're mocking
resources [2].
[1]: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/README.md
[2]: https://lwn.net/Articles/654071/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: dan.j.williams@intel.com (Dan Williams)
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used.
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 15:35:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gcOdBmzhMoyEErwh9Q7sXmWprdYy=W-iSSj+JwT=n6YA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160309215702.20904.61407.stgit@noble>
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016@1:59 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> wrote:
> When alloc_disk(0) is used, the ->major number is ignored and
> irrelevant. Yet several drivers register a major number anyway.
>
> This series of patches removes the pointless registrations. The pmem
> driver also does this, but a patch has already been sent for that
> driver.
>
> Note that I am not in a position to test these beyond simple compile
> testing.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>
> ---
>
> NeilBrown (4):
> nvdimm/blk: don't allocate unused major device number
> nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number
The libnvdimm unit tests were fine with these, applied.
Btw, because you mentioned it, our unit test infrastructure does not
require real hardware. See the ndctl readme [1], and if you have
copious amounts of free time the lwn write up on how we're mocking
resources [2].
[1]: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/README.md
[2]: https://lwn.net/Articles/654071/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-09 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-09 21:59 [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 2/4] nvdimm/btt: don't allocate unused major device number NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 1/4] nvdimm/blk: " NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:05 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 3/4] memstick: don't allocate unused major for ms_block NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 21:59 ` [PATCH 4/4] NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-09 21:59 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-10 9:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 23:35 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2016-03-09 23:35 ` [PATCH 0/4] Remove un-needed 'major' registration when alloc_disk(0) is used Dan Williams
2016-03-09 23:35 ` Dan Williams
2016-03-14 22:50 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-03-14 22:50 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-03-14 22:50 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-03-15 22:15 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-15 22:15 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-15 22:15 ` NeilBrown
2016-03-16 0:20 ` Jens Axboe
2016-03-16 0:20 ` Jens Axboe
2016-03-16 0:20 ` Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAPcyv4gcOdBmzhMoyEErwh9Q7sXmWprdYy=W-iSSj+JwT=n6YA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maximlevitsky@gmail.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.