Received: from mx3.redhat.com (mx3.redhat.com [172.16.48.32]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j310OOO16580 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 19:24:24 -0500 Received: from seeker3.pacific.net.ph (seeker3.pacific.net.ph [210.23.235.106]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j310OIGZ012708 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 19:24:18 -0500 Received: from congo2.pacific.net.ph (congo2.pacific.net.ph [210.23.235.89]) by seeker3.pacific.net.ph with ESMTP id j310OGgB011170 for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:24:16 +0800 Received: from [210.1.105.173] (ppp173.dyn1.105.pacific.net.ph [210.1.105.173] (may be forged)) by congo2.pacific.net.ph with ESMTP id j310OELh008602 for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:24:15 +0800 (PHT) Message-ID: <424CA0D1.5060905@nospam.com> Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:16:01 +0800 From: Andy Sy MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-lvm] Re: putting lvm autodetect into the kernel ala md Reply-To: andy@neotitans.com, 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" To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Luca Berra wrote: > no, [lvm partition detection and activation] is a user space > task, there is no reason to burden the kernel with this. I find that a spurious argument. The kernel autodetects physical partitions, so how is that different from detecting logical ones? From the user's point of view he would want it to happen the same way. In fact, given the flexibility and [purported] negligible overhead of logical volumes, he should not even be bothering with physical partitions anymore. -- reply-to: a n d y @ n e o t i t a n s . c o m