From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757773AbYCEQkN (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:40:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754700AbYCEQkA (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:40:00 -0500 Received: from vena.lwn.net ([206.168.112.25]:49244 "EHLO vena.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754282AbYCEQj7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:39:59 -0500 To: device-mapper development Cc: Daniel Phillips , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] An alternative interface to device mapper From: corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet) In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 05 Mar 2008 01:29:42 PST." <200803050129.43172.phillips@phunq.net> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 09:39:59 -0700 Message-ID: <22778.1204735199@vena.lwn.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hey, Daniel, > In more detail: ddlink is a generic pipe-like interface for controlling > device drivers. I'm not in a position to say much about the wider picture at the moment, but one quibble comes immediately to mind: why do you create yet another communication path into the kernel rather than using netlink, which is already there and used in a number of other contexts? jon