From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:57:00 +0000 Subject: Re: removable media revalidation - udev vs. devfs or static /dev Message-Id: <20040107185656.GB31827@kroah.com> List-Id: References: <200401012333.04930.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <20040103055847.GC5306@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrey Borzenkov , linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 10:38:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Doesn't the kernel always create the main block device for this device? > > If so, udev will catch that. > > But udev should probably also create all the sub-nodes if it doesn't > already. It doesn't, as I thought we could rely on the kernel partition support. > 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. 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