Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC] Pushing device/driver binding decisions to userspace | From | Nicholas Miell <> | Date | Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:45:13 -0800 |
| |
On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 21:22 -0800, Ben Collins wrote: > On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 17:47 -0800, Nicholas Miell wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 17:24 -0800, Ben Collins wrote: > > > On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 16:49 -0800, Nicholas Miell wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 15:39 -0800, Ben Collins wrote: > > > > > > > > What's wrong with making udev or whatever unbind driver A and then bind > > > > driver B if the driver bound by the kernel ends up being the wrong > > > > choice? (Besides the inelegance of the kernel choosing one and then > > > > userspace immediately choosing the other, of course.) > > > > > > > > I'd argue that having multiple drivers for the same hardware is a bit > > > > strange to begin with, but that's another issue entirely. > > > > > > If two drivers are loaded for the same device, there's no way for udev > > > to tell the kernel which driver to use for a device, that I know of. > > > > /sys/bus/*/drivers/*/{bind,unbind} > > "bind" does not tell the driver core to "bind this device with this > driver", it tells it to "bind this driver to whatever devices we match > that aren't already bound". > > That doesn't solve my use case.
I don't have any hardware with multiple drivers lying around, but I'm fairly certain you can write the bus ID of a device into driver A's unbind file and then follow that with a write of that bus ID into driver B's bind file and get the effect that you want.
> > > > Also, that just sounds very horrible to do. If you have udev/dbus events > > > flying around for "device present", "device gone", "device present", > > > then it could make for a very ugly user experience (think of programs to > > > handle devices being started because of these events). > > > > So don't fire the events until after the final binding. > > It's still not a correct solution. If we want a specific driver to be > bound to a specific device, userspace shouldn't have to jump through > hoops to do it. It should be simple and clean. > > The suggestions you are giving require userspace to work around a > deficiency in the kernel, by guessing the ordering requirements to > satisfy what the user wants. In cases of hotplugging, it is also > sometimes impossible to satisfy these requirements using the current > scheme.
Well, the kernel's deficiency is that there's multiple drivers for the same hardware, not that userspace doesn't get first say in how hardware is bound to drivers.
-- Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>
- 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/
| |