[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ac3eb2510905220821n629314c3tb113802f52abc67c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 17:21:17 +0200
From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>,
Pantelis Koukousoulas <pktoss@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: How to tell whether a struct file is held by a process?
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 17:12, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> Anyway, enumeration isn't the problem. The real problem has two parts:
>
> Automatic probing and binding of kernel drivers, including
> selection and installation of a configuration (this really
> _does_ mess up virtualization).
>
> The fact that a window exists immediately after the
> registration of a newly-detected device before a user
> process can lock the device file. During this window,
> other processes could open the file.
>
> The second part can be solved (among cooperating processes) by use of
> port-lock files, with no kernel involvement. The first part does
> require a kernel interface of some sort, but it wouldn't have to be
> complicated. The mere fact that a port-lock file was open could be
> enough to prevent automatic configuration, probing, and binding.
>
> Does this seem like reasonable approach?
Would releasing the "lock" trigger a kernel-driver-binding call?
The lock will always lock all devices of a specific hub?
Thanks,
Kay
--
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