linux-hotplug.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>
To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org
Subject: udev - question about current config format
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:21:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040109142112.GA752@vrfy.org> (raw)

Hi Greg,
I want to ask if we shouldn't change the namedev logic and
make the rules generic and drop the different methods, cause
the name for the method is mostly redundant.
All what namedev does is applying a name when all device attributes
are matching. It's not neccessary to to tell namedev to REPLACE,
cause we always replace :)
And why shouldn't we be able to combine a SYSFS_ attribute with the
KERNEL name?


So here is a first idea:

  Every line in udev.rules consists only of a number of <key>="<value>"

    BUS           match with bus type
    SYSFS_<file>  match with device attribute
    ID/PLACE      match with bus "number" or "id"
    KERNEL        match with kernel device name
    RESULT        match with string returned by executed PROGRAM
    PROGRAM       program to execute (true if exec returned with 0)

    NAME          name for the device node
    SYMLINK       one or more symlinks to NAME

  The rules are processed in the order they are given in the file.
  Every configured KEY must match to apply the rule.
  It would be more flexible cause we may use all possible keys in a rule.
  It would be possible to exec the external program only for one specific
  device to get its name.
  We would be able to skip the expensive execution of the external
  program if one of the other keys doesn't match.

    KERNEL="video*", PROGRAM="script.sh", NAME="%c"
    SYSFS_model="V0815", PROGRAM="script.sh", NAME="%c"
    SYSFS_model="V0815", KERNEL="video*", NAME="video/%n"

Do we need a bus PLACE? In current udev it seems we have the same
processing for TOPOLOGY and NUMBER.


What do you think?
Do I miss something?

thanks,
Kay



-------------------------------------------------------
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

             reply	other threads:[~2004-01-09 14:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-01-09 14:21 Kay Sievers [this message]
2004-01-10  1:30 ` udev - question about current config format Greg KH
2004-01-10  1:38 ` Kay Sievers
2004-01-10  3:52 ` Greg KH
2004-01-10  4:01 ` Kay Sievers
2004-01-10  4:03 ` Greg KH
2004-01-10  5:27 ` Kay Sievers
2004-01-10  5:39 ` Kay Sievers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040109142112.GA752@vrfy.org \
    --to=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
    --cc=linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).