> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> 
> >> no, the way I understood it is that the ioctl stuff is for driver code;
> >> sysdisk(9) is unrelated.
> > 
> > i don't understand how it can be unrelated to driver stuff,
> > which knows overlapped partitions, etc.
> 
> it is right below: (sysdisk - subsystem that wants to protect itself can
> register a disk as "used by the system", disk_ioctl - make it easier for
> driver authors to avoid errors. the two complete each other.)

do you mean you are going to commit your initial patch,
ignoring complicated things like partitions,
"layered" devices like raidframe, etc?
if so, i tend to object.

honestly, i think it's a bad time to implement things like this.
once we finished the transition to wedges, this kind of things should be
more straightforward to do...

YAMAMOTO Takashi