IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 16:15, Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk> wrote:
> I've been looking at what is responsible for all the path lookup activity in
> coldplug. On my debian stable system, it looks like every device gets its
> parent looked up in sysfs. I think this is due to SUBSYSTEMS matches.
>
> I see the udev default rules are different, but it looks like they still
> test for SUBSYSTEMS on every single device. Should we add SUBSYSTEM="scsi_generic"
> to these three rules?
UDev follows the kernel given name, and re-uses the kernel created
device node. If the kernel and spcecified udev rules disagree, the
udev specified node node is created and the kernel-created on is
deleted.
I don't see any security implications, to be actually useful,
/dev/cpu/<n>/cpuid should be world readable. The cpuid instruction
can be called from userspace anyway, so there is nothing to hide.
The device does not support any write operation, so 0444 should
suffice.
Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@amd.com>
Instead of of our own private monitor socket, we send the
processed event back to our netlink socket, to the multicast
group 2 -- so any number of users can listen to udev events,
just like they can listen to kernel emitted events on group 1.
md/array_state in case of partition doesn't exist, so all uevents
for partitions didn't execute any SYMLINK rules
Signed-off-by: Michal Soltys <soltys@ziu.info>
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 08:43, Harald Hoyer <harald@redhat.com> wrote:
> Radek Vykydal <rvykydal@redhat.com> encountered a problem with md devices.
> If the raid is about to be removed a "change" and "remove" event is sent.
$env{ID_PATH} includes the "-nst" suffix anyway, so we shouldn't append
it a second time as part of the rule creating the device file symlink.
Signed-off-by: Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 01:26, Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 12:39:16AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 00:26, Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > The upstream raw(8) command supports /dev/rawctl and also
>> > /dev/raw/rawctl. I think it makes more sense to use raw/rawctl when
>> > you have all your raw devices in raw/ subdirectory (e.g. /dev/raw/raw<N>).
>>
>> The raw tool looks for /dev/rawctl first and the fallback to
>> /dev/raw/rawctl is named DEVFS_*. Should we turn that order around and
>> remove the devfs notion from the raw tool and let udev create a
>> dev/raw/rawctl node?
>
> Yeah. Fixed, committed and pushed.
>
> $ strace -e open ./raw
> open("/dev/raw/rawctl", O_RDWR) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
> open("/dev/rawctl", O_RDWR) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>
> I have also removed the #ifdef OLD_RAW_DEVS (/dev/raw<N>) junk.
