1
0
mirror of https://github.com/systemd/systemd.git synced 2024-11-02 10:51:20 +03:00
Commit Graph

17 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
d2cf99df7d [PATCH] udevd - kill the lockfile 2005-04-26 21:32:26 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
54988802b7 [PATCH] add udev logging to info log
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 05:14:16AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 01:10:43PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 02:34:26PM -0600, Clay Haapala wrote:
> > > On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Chris Friesen spake thusly:
> > > >
> > > > Maybe for ones with a matching rule, you could print something like:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Is the act of printing/syslogging a rule in an of itself?
> >
> > No, as currently the only way stuff ends up in the syslog is if
> > DEBUG=true is used on the build line.
> >
> > But it's sounding like we might want to change that... :)
>
> How about this in the syslog after connect/disconnect?
>
>   Jan 15 05:07:45 pim udev[28007]: configured rule in '/etc/udev/udev.rules' at line 17 applied, 'video*' becomes 'video/webcam%n'
>   Jan 15 05:07:45 pim udev[28007]: creating device node '/udev/video/webcam0'
>   Jan 15 05:07:47 pim udev[28015]: removing device node '/udev/video/webcam0'

Here is a slightly better version. I've created a logging.h file and
moved the debug macros from udev.h in there.

If you type:

  'make'            - you will get a binary that prints one or two lines to syslog
                      if a device node is created or deleted

  'make LOG=false'  - you get a binary that prints asolutely nothing

  'make DEBUG=true' - the same as today, it will print all debug lines
2005-04-26 21:13:17 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
808423c90c [PATCH] small cleanup udev-remove.c
Here is a small cleanup. It replaces the malloc in udev-remove.c
with a struct, like we do in udev-add.c
2005-04-26 21:13:10 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
a56ef38286 [PATCH] udev-remove.c cleanups
I've moved the malloc out of the udevdb into udev-remove to free the
struct after use and not to allocate a different struct in the case the
device is not in the data base. I seems a bit easier to read.
2005-04-26 21:13:09 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
a81805b9af [PATCH] bug in udev-remove.c
Uups, we have a bug in udev-remove.c.

udev segfaults with NULL-pointer, if the device is not in the database:

  ./test.block: line 29:  4844 Segmentation fault      $BIN block
  Dec 17 22:47:42 pim udev[4882]: udev_remove_device: '/block/sdy' not found in database, falling back on default name
  Dec 17 22:47:42 pim udev[4882]: udev_remove_device: name is '(null)'
2005-04-26 21:13:09 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
4763256c65 [PATCH] allow multiple symlinks
Here is a patch to allow the creation of multiple symlinks.
The names must be separated by a space character.


REPLACE, KERNEL="ttyUSB0", NAME="visor", SYMLINK="first-%n second-%n third-%n"

results in:

Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: mknod(udev-root/visor, 020666, 188, 0)
Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: symlink 'udev-root/first-0' to node 'visor' requested
Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: symlink(./visor, udev-root/first-0)
Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: symlink 'udev-root/second-0' to node 'visor' requested
Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: symlink(./visor, udev-root/second-0)
Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: symlink 'udev-root/third-0' to node 'visor' requested
Dec  9 05:28:51 pim udev[12019]: create_node: symlink(./visor, udev-root/third-0)
2005-04-26 21:13:07 -07:00
greg@kroah.com
7ac0feeb60 [PATCH] move all of the DBUS logic into one file and remove all of the #ifdef crud from the main code. 2005-04-26 21:13:06 -07:00
david@fubar.dk
5aebfbcb62 [PATCH] D-BUS patch for udev-008
Attached is a patch against udev-008 to send out a D-BUS message when a
device node is added or removed.

Using D-BUS lingo, udev acquires the org.kernel.udev service and sends
out a NodeCreated or NodeDeleted signal on the
org.kernel.udev.NodeMonitor interface. Each signal carries two
parameters: the node in question and the corresponding sysfs path.

[Note: the D-BUS concepts of service, interface, object can be a bit
confusing at first glance]

An example program listening for these messages looks like this

#!/usr/bin/python

import dbus
import gtk

def udev_signal_received(dbus_iface, member, service, object_path, message):
    [filename, sysfs_path] = message.get_args_list()
    if member=='NodeCreated':
        print 'Node %s created for %s'%(filename, sysfs_path)
    elif member=='NodeDeleted':
        print 'Node %s deleted for %s'%(filename, sysfs_path)

def main():
    bus = dbus.Bus(dbus.Bus.TYPE_SYSTEM)
    bus.add_signal_receiver(udev_signal_received,
                            'org.kernel.udev.NodeMonitor',  # interface
                            'org.kernel.udev',              # service
                            '/org/kernel/udev/NodeMonitor') # object

    gtk.mainloop()

if __name__ == '__main__':
    main()

and this is the output when hot-plugging some usb-storage.

[david@laptop udev-008]$ ~/node_monitor.py
Node /udev/sda created for /block/sda
Node /udev/sda1 created for /block/sda/sda1
Node /udev/sda1 deleted for /block/sda/sda1
Node /udev/sda deleted for /block/sda

The patch requires D-BUS 0.20 or later while the python example program
requires D-BUS from CVS as I only recently applied a patch against the
python bindings.
2005-04-26 21:13:06 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
3d150dfb28 [PATCH] experimental (very simple) SYMLINK creation
> > here is a experimental symlink creation patch - for discussion,
> > in which direction we should go.
> > It is possible now to define SYMLINK= after the NAME= in udev.rules.
> > The link is relative to the node, but the path is not optimized now
> > if the node and the link are in the same nested directory.
> > Only one link is supported, cause i need to sleep now :)
> >
> > 06-simple-symlink-creation.diff
> >   simple symlink creation
> >   reorganized udev-remove to have access to the symlink field
> >   subdir creation/removal are functions now
> >   udev-test.pl tests for link creation/removal

Here is a new version with relative link target path optimization
an better tests in udev-test.pl:

LABEL, BUS="scsi", vendor="IBM-ESXS", NAME="1/2/a/b/node", SYMLINK="1/2/c/d/symlink"

  Dec  7 06:48:34 pim udev[13789]: create_node: symlink 'udev-root/1/2/c/d/symlink' to node '1/2/a/b/node' requested
  Dec  7 06:48:34 pim udev[13789]: create_path: created 'udev-root/1/2/c'
  Dec  7 06:48:34 pim udev[13789]: create_path: created 'udev-root/1/2/c/d'
  Dec  7 06:48:34 pim udev[13789]: create_node: symlink(../../a/b/node, udev-root/1/2/c/d/symlink)
2005-04-26 21:13:06 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
f7b4eca455 [PATCH] overall whitespace + debug text conditioning
01-overall-whitespace+debug-text-conditioning.diff
  o cleanup whitespace
  o clarify a few comments
  o enclose all printed debug string values in ''
2005-04-26 21:13:03 -07:00
kay.sievers@vrfy.org
218eae8727 [PATCH] add support for subdirs
support subdirectory creation/removal for NAME="/devfs/is/crazy/video0"
  create parent subdirs for device node if needed
  remove subdirs when last node is removed
2005-04-26 21:06:23 -07:00
greg@kroah.com
c056c5141b [PATCH] make config files, sysfs root, and udev root configurable from config variables
This will make running tests a lot simpler.
2005-04-26 21:01:42 -07:00
greg@kroah.com
5840bc63e2 [PATCH] major database cleanups
Now we standardise on a struct udevice to pass around, and store in the
database.  This cleaned up the database code a lot.
2005-04-26 21:01:42 -07:00
greg@kroah.com
a9ce0a410e [PATCH] more database work. Now we only store the info we really need right now.
Also delete the record after the device is gone, and fix up a memory leak.
2005-04-26 21:01:42 -07:00
greg@kroah.com
ca99986023 [PATCH] got "remove of named devices" working.
database code still needs some major cleanup.
2005-04-26 21:01:41 -07:00
dsteklof@us.ibm.com
8e41d35d76 [PATCH] udevdb prototype
Here's an "idea" of what I had in mind for udevdb. Let me preface the
code with a few remarks:

1) I was expecting to write this udevdb for udev to keep track of
devices. I was planning an external package that depends upon udev
to provide an external API to the udevdb database. The calls for the
interface would be read only access. Not sure how you want to do
packaging, if having a separate package is ok or having it included
in udev.

2) I created it as it is because udev isn't a daemon. So, the open
database call doesn't take any parameters. My plan was to create a
udevdb_init function that took arguments for initializing the db
to start, where you could specify in memory only or a file location.
This can all be filled in.

3) I hacked the Makefile to get it to work. Not sure how you'd want
that in the future.

4) This assumes TDB has been installed elsewhere, you would need to
edit your Makefile and point it to the header and library locations.
How do you want to do TDB in udev? Do you want to just reference it
and make udev dependent on that package being installed. Or should
we do what samba does and include a limited tdb version in udev?

5) Again, I hacked udev into your existing code. In the future, I'd
probably make a function around the filling out the udevice before
calling the store command. Didn't know if you wanted to change
your add device function to use struct udevice rather than having
everything separate.

6) Not sure what we should include in the udevice structure that's stored
by udev. I made a stab at a first shot - we can add and remove of course,
this was a first pass. I've come to realize - with you including libsysfs
in udev, the "external" interface that references udevdb could make
use of getting information from through libsysfs from sysfs and doesn't
need to be in udevdb.

7) I could write a namedevdb for namedev's device management if you
wanted.
2005-04-26 21:01:40 -07:00
greg@kroah.com
ea733a2f00 [PATCH] split udev main logic into udev-add and udev-remove. 2005-04-26 21:01:39 -07:00