From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KTuqT-0001Xi-1U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:39:41 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KTuqS-0001XO-5r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:39:40 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55145 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KTuqR-0001XL-Vb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:39:39 -0400
Received: from static-87-79-238-240.netcologne.de ([87.79.238.240]:36056
	helo=honk.sigxcpu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <agx@sigxcpu.org>) id 1KTuqR-0000X3-Cr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:39:39 -0400
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 09:46:38 +0200
From: Guido =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=FCnther?= <agx@sigxcpu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/5] husb: support for USB host device
	auto connect.
Message-ID: <20080815074638.GA31016@bogon.ms20.nix>
References: <cover.1218685607.git.maxk@kernel.org>
	<bc54baf4e955c96be17282e99323f11dcf070a4e.1218685608.git.maxk@kernel.org>
	<48A46033.3070200@codemonkey.ws> <48A489D3.5070900@kernel.org>
	<48A493DE.40506@codemonkey.ws> <48A496E9.2030800@kernel.org>
	<48A49878.1010502@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48A49878.1010502@codemonkey.ws>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Max Krasnyansky <maxk@kernel.org>

On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 03:41:28PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Max Krasnyansky wrote:
>>>> Do you mind if we do something like that incrementally ?
>>>>         
>>> Yeah, I don't really want to have QEMU depend on dbus so in this case,
>>> polling would be better.
>>>     
>>
>> I'm thinking that maybe we could use 'inotify' on /proc/bus/usb.
>> Would you be ok with 'inotify' ?
>>   
>
> Yeah, but I would be a little surprised if /proc/bus/usb supports inotify...
What about /dev/bus/usb - it supports inotify fine on udev?
 -- Guido