linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091119144853.GA1398@srcf.ucam.org>
Date:	Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:48:53 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
Cc:	David Zeuthen <david@...ar.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Add support for uevents on block device idle
	changes

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 03:34:53PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:

> Single-subscriber event interfaces are usually a no-go for generic
> infrastructure like this. We still have the unmodified HAL running
> until it is dead, and this works only because there are no such
> awkward interfaces. In a few years we will probably have diskfoo
> replacing dk-disks, and then ... :)

If you've got any ideas for what a multi-subscriber interface would look 
like, I'm happy look at it. I don't think there's an especially 
compelling use-case for one right now so I'm not enthusiastic about the 
additional complexity that'd be required, but as long as there's basic 
agreement that it's not practical to do this in userspace then we're at 
least on the same page.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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/