From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kay Sievers Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:49:46 +0000 Subject: Re: udev 16, two copies of udevd Message-Id: <20040205234946.GA3607@vrfy.org> List-Id: References: <20040204011117.26382.qmail@web14912.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040204011117.26382.qmail@web14912.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 09:25:05AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:24PM -0800, Jon Smirl wrote: > > Yes, I'm mounting a tmpfs. I'm using the tmpfs becuase I've been having trouble > > with stale nodes in my udev dir when I crash the kernel. > > > > How is this going to work in final form? Will I need an initial /dev with mknod > > for the 4-5 minimal devices needed to boot, and then can I mount a tmpfs over > > this to hold udev devices? > > I don't know, what do you think it should look like? Jon, please try the current bk tree. We switched away from the socket file, that gets missing with the tmpfs mount. It should work now, cause we can't listen twice on the same socket in abstract namespace. Greg, it seems we can remove the lock file code completely. Anyone willing to try? Just comment out the one_and_only() and look if you can produce any situation with two udevd's running. It works for me nice without it, also on tmpfs. thanks, Kay ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ 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