From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266195AbUBDAAv (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:00:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266211AbUBDAAv (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:00:51 -0500 Received: from buerotecgmbh.de ([217.160.181.99]:6532 "EHLO buerotecgmbh.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266195AbUBDAAs (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2004 19:00:48 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 01:01:17 +0100 From: Kay Sievers To: Greg KH Cc: Martin Schlemmer , linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Linux Kernel Mailing Lists Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] udev 016 release Message-ID: <20040204000117.GA31071@vrfy.org> References: <20040203201359.GB19476@kroah.com> <1075843712.7473.60.camel@nosferatu.lan> <1075849413.11322.6.camel@nosferatu.lan> <20040203231341.GA22058@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040203231341.GA22058@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 03:13:41PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 01:03:33AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 23:28, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > > On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 22:13, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > Except if I miss something major, udevsend and udevd still do not > > > work: > > > > > > > Skip that, it does work if SEQNUM is set :P > > > > Anyhow, is it _really_ needed for SEQNUM to be set? What about > > the attached patch? > > Yes it is necessary, as that is what the kernel spits out. It's also > the whole reason we need udevd :) > > If you don't want to give a SEQNUM, just call udev directly. Oh, never use this udevsend in any script. It expects the SEQNUM from the kernel, not a random one from you! You will always get timeouts everytime you use your own SEQNUM, like the timeout after the start of udevd. If you really need udevsend, I can't imagine for what case, we need to add some logic to it, to bypass the event ordering and waiting to put the event straight to the exec_queue. > > 2) events gets missing. If you for example use udevsend in the > > initscript that populate /dev (/udev), the amount of nodes/links > > created is off with about 10-50 (once about 250) entries. Your are calling udevsend with your script? > Hm, that's not good. I'll go test that and see what's happening. thanks, Kay