From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EB5B5D6A3 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:37:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f169.google.com (mail-qt0-f169.google.com [209.85.216.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AB15C119CA7 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:37:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f169.google.com with SMTP id a16so23409338qtj.3 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 01:37:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171218174915.snuf5ctm4ud5naye@reti> References: <20171218174915.snuf5ctm4ud5naye@reti> From: Thanos Makatos Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:36:51 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] lvm filter regex format Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: LVM general discussion and development > Out of interest why are you using the length of the device name as a discriminator? In my case I am the one who creates these devices so I fully control the naming scheme, however there are other components in our product that might create device mapper targets and I shouldn't filter them out.