From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phillip Susi Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:35:04 +0000 Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] Inhibiting plug and play Message-Id: <51E58448.5000100@ubuntu.com> List-Id: References: <51C09CA5.6020902@ubuntu.com> In-Reply-To: <51C09CA5.6020902@ubuntu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 7/16/2013 1:23 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > So, Kay suggested we should use BSD file locks for this. i.e. all > tools which want to turn off events for a device would take one on > that specific device fd. As long as it is taken udev would not > generate events. As soon as the BSD lock is released again it would > recheck the device. > > To me this sounds like a pretty clean thing to do. Locks usually > suck, but for this purpose they appear to do exactly what they > should, and most of the problematic things with them don't apply in > this specific case. > > Doing things way would be quite robust, as we have clean > synchronization and the kernel will release the locks automatically > when the owner dies. > > Opinions? Sounds like it might work. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJR5YRIAAoJEJrBOlT6nu75VLUH/3X7fHhppdUCw5WFt1PpitKK O9tuPcs9RZBWhaQ+Ol9Sp82qnEG+mqmmCLAc3z35Zj1PpNRKTLYrGWbmqlbkPsks ZU4UZTnr9i03uDRuQfSMtUsTpnriBILT8tfyPkH7XYulGBligI3D3Sdk6LWD6Y6J tm0SnVlOk/tm4FasWFT4KlFp/obRuL8yUBnZvgYqyTblCeVTX2013xEtXN/TG9pH 4iNSgRTQ98K/EdZQP1yz2j/LSLn0MFQTCPU4YuDVmds9nU2iZAllaY+sSMQCSkm6 Ks4giagyhKsBw8oy3AAN5f/VEvpriuAAVrLxNNaTzTAfR//J7gHwzB40ploB3oo=+o3u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----