lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: removable media revalidation - udev vs. devfs or static /dev
    Date
    Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com> writes:

    > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 10:57:00AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
    > > Hm, that would work, but what about a user program that just polls on
    > > the device, as the rest of this thread discusses? As removable devices
    > > are not the "norm" it would seem a bit of overkill to create 16
    > > partitions for every block device, if they need them or not.
    >
    > Um, adding all 16 partitions for a block device that has 5
    > defined is opposite of the intention of udev, no?

    It shouldn't be _that_ bad.

    removable media devices usually tell you that they are removable media
    devices (scsi: inquiry data has a bit for that IIRC). If you pass
    this up to hotplug it can use that to figure whenever it has a hard
    disk (=> just create the existing partitions) or a removable device
    (=> create a few more nodes to catch the usual removable media
    layouts).

    I also think you don't need *all* minors for removable media. I
    havn't seen removable media with extended partitions so far. IIRC zip
    floppys are using /dev/sda4 and most other ones either /dev/sda1 or
    /dev/sda directly, so we likely can catch 99% with just three device
    nodes.

    Gerd

    --
    You have a new virus in /var/mail/kraxel
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.028 / U:3.812 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site