summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/crypto/tea.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAlex Elder <elder@inktank.com>2012-08-10 20:12:10 (GMT)
committerAlex Elder <elder@inktank.com>2012-10-01 19:30:53 (GMT)
commit02cdb02ceab1f3dd9ac2bc899fc51f0e0e744782 (patch)
tree0f9d8c79fa2eaab44a969592d5cf189bd82bf7c7 /crypto/tea.c
parent589d30e0b3e649e2660f9a67be88e235b28bc319 (diff)
downloadlinux-02cdb02ceab1f3dd9ac2bc899fc51f0e0e744782.tar.xz
rbd: kill create_snap sysfs entry
Josh proposed the following change, and I don't think I could explain it any better than he did: From: Josh Durgin <josh.durgin@inktank.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 14:22:11 -0700 To: ceph-devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org> Message-ID: <500F1203.9050605@inktank.com> Right now the kernel still has one piece of rbd management duplicated from the rbd command line tool: snapshot creation. There's nothing special about snapshot creation that makes it advantageous to do from the kernel, so I'd like to remove the create_snap sysfs interface. That is, /sys/bus/rbd/devices/<id>/create_snap would be removed. Does anyone rely on the sysfs interface for creating rbd snapshots? If so, how hard would it be to replace with: rbd snap create pool/image@snap Is there any benefit to the sysfs interface that I'm missing? Josh This patch implements this proposal, removing the code that implements the "snap_create" sysfs interface for rbd images. As a result, quite a lot of other supporting code goes away. Suggested-by: Josh Durgin <josh.durgin@inktank.com> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@inktank.com> Reviewed-by: Josh Durgin <josh.durgin@inktank.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'crypto/tea.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions