From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver-core: devtmpfs - driver core maintained /dev tmpfs Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 14:54:34 -0700 Message-ID: <20090502215434.GB17622@kroah.com> References: <1241097822.2516.3.camel@poy> <20090502071636.GA9487@infradead.org> <9b2b86520905021322l31845d2dubad98d78380aa1d5@mail.gmail.com> <9b2b86520905021441r76ba0b73u1ef02b5aa855a02b@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:48476 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755360AbZEBV5u (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 May 2009 17:57:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9b2b86520905021441r76ba0b73u1ef02b5aa855a02b@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alan Jenkins Cc: Kay Sievers , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel , Jan Blunck , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, adam@yggdrasil.com On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 10:41:50PM +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote: > > But is read-only so bad? You just have to copy it over to a tmpfs and > then mount that on top of /dev. That's atomic, so it won't interfere > with parallel early init. The copy would not be atomic. > I sympathize, devtmpfs is a really neat hack that does exactly what > udev needs. But you have to admit, it doesn't fit in _quite_ as well > with the kernel status quo. I disagree, it mirrors exactly what we are doing today from userspace, which is quite the "status quo" in that distros have been doing that for years now :) thanks, greg k-h