Re: Future devfs plans (sorry for previous incomplete message)

[Alexander E. Patrakov]

Norberto Bensa wrote:

> Trent Lloyd wrote:
>
> > Wouldn't a possible solution to do this to develop an extension to tmpfs to
> > catch files accessed that don't exist etc and use that in conjuction
> > with udev?
>
>
> Why would you want to do that? If the device node doesn't exist -> there's no 
> hardware -> there's no need to load a driver/module.

Wrong - think about /dev/loop0

> udev/hotplug are doing the right thing (tm)

They are doing the right thing (tm) _only_ in conjunction with this 
bootscript snippet:

	KVERSION=`uname -r`
        for module in `egrep '^alias (char|block)-major' \
            /lib/modules/$KVERSION/modules.alias /etc/modprobe.conf | \
            grep -v 1394 | awk '{print $3;}'`
        do
            modprobe $module
        done

I have, however, posted this snippet to linux-hotplug-devel and they 
rejected it for no apparent reason. This snippet loads exactly the same 
modules as the kernel would autoload with static /dev.

The "grep -v 1394" is due to the kernel bug described in the following 
message: http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/5/30/143

Also the recent "enable all hotplug events" patch 
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/7/13/74 + http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/7/20/47) 
with a custom initramfs 
(http://bugs.linuxfromscratch.org/attachment.cgi?id=112&action=view) is 
a very good thing.

--
Alexander E. Patrakov

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