From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: Re: 2.6.10-rc1-mm3: ACPI problem due to un-exported hotplug_path Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 23:15:55 -0500 Message-ID: <200411092315.55187.dtor_core@ameritech.net> References: <20041105001328.3ba97e08.akpm@osdl.org> <20041110000811.GA8543@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20041110000811.GA8543-U8xfFu+wG4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Cc: Greg KH , Keshavamurthy Anil S , Kay Sievers , tokunaga.keiich-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, motoyuki-tPnzhWqfZ96MLkP6nYsO9A@public.gmane.org, Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , rml-Et1tbQHTxzrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, len.brown-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 09 November 2004 07:08 pm, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 06:48:17PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:55:02 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 09:18:48PM -0800, Keshavamurthy Anil S wrote: > > > > Also, since you have brought this, I have one another question to you. > > > > Now in the new kernel, I see whenever anybody calls sysdev_register(kobj), > > > > an "ADD" notification is sent. why is this? I would like to call > > > > kobject_hotplug(kobj, ADD) later. > > > > > > This happens when kobject_add() is called. You shouldn't ever need to > > > call kobject_hotplug() for an add event yourself. > > > > > > > This is not always the case. One might want to postpone ADD event > > until all summpelental object attributes are created. This way userspace > > is presented with object in consistent state. > > No, that's a mess. Let userspace wait for those attributes to show up > if they need to. That's what the "wait_for_sysfs" program bundled with > udev is for. > I strongly disagree: - it makes userspace being aware of implementation details (whe exactly it has to wait for, for how long, etc.) which is bad thing; - not all the world is udev - needless replication of the code and bugs; - not only making visible but announcing an object in non-working state to userspace simply does not feel right. -- Dmitry ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click