From: Roman Kagan <rkagan@mail.ru>
To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] udev: add rule based program execution
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:39:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050330073919.GA2239@katya> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050329145403.GA16544@vrfy.org>
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 04:54:03PM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> To get this working, I changed the logic to read all rules and not to
> stop at the first match.
That's very nice, indeed.
> If a rule should be the last one to be applied
> to a device it must use OPTION="last_rule".
IMHO this is going to increase admin's chances to shoot himself in the
foot. Imagine someone having installed a rules file causing the
processing of a particular type to stop early, and then someone (else)
trying to figure out what's wrong with another rules file matching the
same devices but happening to go later in the list.
I beleive all rules must be independently processed; the only reason for
the user to care about the order of the rules should be when a rule
depends on the _results_ of the action of another rule.
As to the notorious "too many tty devices" problem, I guess it can be
worked around with something like
SUBSYSTEM="tty", NAME=""
or
SUBSYSTEM!="tty", HOTPLUG="/some/slow/hotplug/script"
> After the first rule that
> assigns a NAME to a device, all later rules with a NAME key will be
> ignored, so it should not change the current behavior too much.
Same problem here: changing the order of the (seemingly independent!)
rules may cause unexpected change of which rule applies. What's wrong
with executing all NAME actions? At worst it'll create multiple device
nodes for the same device - big deal...
Cheers,
Roman.
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id\x14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-30 7:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-29 14:54 [PATCH] udev: add rule based program execution Kay Sievers
2005-03-29 15:20 ` Kevin P. Fleming
2005-03-30 7:39 ` Roman Kagan [this message]
2005-03-30 12:05 ` Kay Sievers
2005-03-30 14:08 ` Roman Kagan
2005-03-30 17:29 ` Kay Sievers
2005-03-30 19:21 ` Greg KH
2005-03-30 20:20 ` Kay Sievers
2005-04-01 0:18 ` Greg KH
2005-04-01 7:30 ` Kay Sievers
2005-04-02 6:54 ` Greg KH
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=20050330073919.GA2239@katya \
--to=rkagan@mail.ru \
--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).