Re: asynchronous calls an the lack of --wait-for-completion options (e.g. modprobe, losetup, cryptsetup)

[Alan Cox]

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:35:07 +0200
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 14:08, Alexander Holler<holler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 20.06.2009 21:20, Kay Sievers wrote:
> 
> > Anyway, I still think, that the creation of the device-node is (seen from a
> > user-point) part of the module-initialization or part of the operation of
> > the userland-tool (like modprobe, losetup or cryptsetup). So in my point of
> > view, they should at least offer an option to wait until udev finished that
> > operation and should not rely on the user to call udevadm.
> 
> That would be all solved properly by "devtmpfs":
>    http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/30/182

which unsolves lots of other problems and has good reasons why people
object to it.

Sorting out waiting behaviour and fixing udev to do jobs once is a user
space problem and while it might benefit from some tiny bits of kernel
help re-implementing devfs (which we've been through before thank you) is
not the cure but replacing a minor ailment with a nasty disease
--
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/