Hello,
On (03/05/15 09:20), Minchan Kim wrote:
> I'm not against but I want to know why we should support
> user-defined device id. What usecase do you have in mind?
>
hm, you never know what people can come up with. that's probably the
strongest support argument I can provide. I wish there was something
like - my friend Mike has a "device /dev/zram1 is always swap device,
device /dev/zram$(id -u) is a per-user zram device (he finds it useful,
because just looking at device id he can easily tell who owns that
device)" policy. but nothing like that. I just think that it can be
useful. no real use cases (well, partly because we don't support device
add/remove).
/* yet "/dev/zram$(id -u)" thing looks interesting */
user defined id support comes at a price of ~10 lines of code, or even
less. we waste much more code to show ->stats, and not all of them are
of any real use, to be fair. that just said, that dropping user defined
id is not a great deal. ok, let's see if we can come up with anything by
the end of this day and I'll send out a removal patch if nothing pop up.
-ss
> Could we support automatic id support only at this moment?
> Then, if some user complains about that in future, we could turn
> on user-defined device id easily and we could know the usecase.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
