[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090504162011.GO17956@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 18:20:11 +0200
From: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@...e.de>
To: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@...glemail.com>
Cc: Michael Riepe <michael.riepe@...glemail.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver-core: devtmpfs - driver core maintained /dev
tmpfs
On 2009-05-02T23:47:03, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org> wrote:
> It is not about missing events, it is about the bootstrap step we
> would like to avoid. Buffering events, or reading all device
> information from sysfs at this stage introduces a hard checkpoint,
> where we need to bring a process up process these events and create
> nodes for them. Only after that we can start other things in userspace
> which depend on a working /dev, and with the kernel populated one, we
> can just go ahead.
So if udevd was present before the kernel started scanning devices this
would not be as much of a problem, would it?
(Couldn't udevd trigger the device scan? Could it be started so early as
for this not to matter?)
And isn't part of the problem that you have a choke point in the
dependency graph - namely "/dev working" as a predicate for running
certain services/scripts - instead of more fine-grained dependencies for
just the devices they need?
Regards,
Lars
--
SuSE Labs, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists