From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755442AbYAXMeR (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:34:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754246AbYAXMeE (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:34:04 -0500 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.188]:63258 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754323AbYAXMeD (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:34:03 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=fAQ5JekQSPdo6zuUsU9j09/90BcjIV7NvKs5cTvhiItJN0tx8tc2RyB/jAkti5PrD+OuHd+nJLuK5SHCAbuz8FIYlbiNiTn8bMEzTfwNWdY9tgfqtE7T7o3scHGAk65tIH4iMaUhTmFUg7MB+jHlJlDON50NAgA5eMZ6KW0cvks= Message-ID: <84144f020801240434s3ce63e58m8ffb74d70c0aef32@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:34:00 +0200 From: "Pekka Enberg" To: "Oliver Neukum" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Missing usb_find_device symbol from usb.c Cc: "Wilco Beekhuizen" , "Greg KH" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200801241324.26868.oliver@neukum.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <6c4c86470801221118x530ee074qedb1da5eac1ca473@mail.gmail.com> <200801241249.06577.oliver@neukum.org> <84144f020801240352r688fbbccu52ce9aa8ea3f199@mail.gmail.com> <200801241324.26868.oliver@neukum.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7c34979ba5427298 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Oliver, On Jan 24, 2008 2:24 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Sure but the filesystems in fs/ are general purpose and they can be > > mounted on top of any block device (except for the in-memory ones like > > nfs, cifs, jffs, ... But none of them mess around with *hardware*. Sure, you can split it in two: driver and filesystem but yet again, the latter is not general purpose at all. I think this is somewhat similar to spufs which is really hardware specific and thus not eligible for fs/. On Jan 24, 2008 2:24 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > sysfs). Furthermore, the problem with iriverfs is that it assumes that > > there can be only one device plugged to the host. What we want is > > something like > > > > $ mount -t iriverfs /dev/iriver0 /mnt/media > > > > Which can be accomplished with an USB driver in driver/usb/ that > > registers the special iriverfs. > > And what happens if you do > mount -t vfat /dev/iriver0 /mnt/media ? If /dev/iriver0 is registered as a block device, we read the superblock but don't find a vfat filesystem and the mount fails as expected. As for mount -t iriverfs /dev/sd1 /mnt/media we need to make sure file_system_type->get_sb() does something like what drivers/mtd/mtdsuper.c::get_sb_mtd() does to make sure we only let it mount if the block device is indeed an iriver player. Pekka