On Tue, 19 February 2008 23:33:38 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> Given that loop works in this way, I certainly see that as doable,
> but then I'd vote for using the existing ioctl semantics of
> LOOP_SET_FD and LOOP_DEL_FD on the mtdchar device, which already
> comes with an ioctl interface for mtd devices.
> I'd probably also allow the LOOP_{GET,SET}_STATUS{,64} commands,
> so you can actually use the existing losetup tool.
> That way, we wouldn't have to introduce a new API, just extend
> an existing one to work on more things.
I like this approach. It somewhat collides with the mtd principle of
having a seperate module for every 2-3 lines of code, but maybe that is
not a bad thing after all.
Onto my list of code to write on rainy afternoons (and secretly hoping
for others to do it instead).
Jörn
--
Mundie uses a textbook tactic of manipulation: start with some
reasonable talk, and lead the audience to an unreasonable conclusion.
-- Bruce Perens
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
