From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:24:34 +0000 Subject: Re: removable media revalidation - udev vs. devfs or static /dev Message-Id: <20040107192434.GA823@kroah.com> List-Id: References: <200401012333.04930.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <20040103055847.GC5306@kroah.com> <20040107185656.GB31827@kroah.com> <3FFC5CBB.5050507@kolumbus.fi> In-Reply-To: <3FFC5CBB.5050507@kolumbus.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Mika =?iso-8859-1?Q?Penttil=E4?= Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrey Borzenkov , linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:23:39PM +0200, Mika Penttil=E4 wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 10:38:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >>And it really has to create _all_ of them, exactly because there's no w= ay > >>to know ahead-of-time which of them will be available. > >> > >>Then, user space can just access "/dev/sda1" or whatever, and the act o= f=20 > >>accessing it will force the re-scan. > >> =20 > >> > > > >Hm, that would work, but what about a user program that just polls on > >the device, as the rest of this thread discusses? As removable devices > >are not the "norm" it would seem a bit of overkill to create 16 > >partitions for every block device, if they need them or not. > > > Accessing the partition would not cause the rescan (accessing the whole=20 > disk causes.) I think devfs does/did this rescan on access. It would rescan on access of a partition or the main block device? If accessing the partition doesn't work, than having udev create all partitions wouldn't help anything :( thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software. Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms. Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html _______________________________________________ Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266177AbUAGTYn (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:24:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266211AbUAGTYn (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:24:43 -0500 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([65.200.24.183]:62850 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266177AbUAGTYk (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:24:40 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:24:34 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Mika =?iso-8859-1?Q?Penttil=E4?= Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrey Borzenkov , linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: removable media revalidation - udev vs. devfs or static /dev Message-ID: <20040107192434.GA823@kroah.com> References: <200401012333.04930.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <20040103055847.GC5306@kroah.com> <20040107185656.GB31827@kroah.com> <3FFC5CBB.5050507@kolumbus.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3FFC5CBB.5050507@kolumbus.fi> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:23:39PM +0200, Mika Penttilä wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 10:38:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >>And it really has to create _all_ of them, exactly because there's no way > >>to know ahead-of-time which of them will be available. > >> > >>Then, user space can just access "/dev/sda1" or whatever, and the act of > >>accessing it will force the re-scan. > >> > >> > > > >Hm, that would work, but what about a user program that just polls on > >the device, as the rest of this thread discusses? As removable devices > >are not the "norm" it would seem a bit of overkill to create 16 > >partitions for every block device, if they need them or not. > > > Accessing the partition would not cause the rescan (accessing the whole > disk causes.) I think devfs does/did this rescan on access. It would rescan on access of a partition or the main block device? If accessing the partition doesn't work, than having udev create all partitions wouldn't help anything :( thanks, greg k-h