From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263956AbTDNV32 (for ); Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:29:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263957AbTDNV2j (for ); Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:28:39 -0400 Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.105]:18863 "EHLO e5.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263956AbTDNV2d (for ); Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:28:33 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 14:34:05 -0700 From: Greg KH To: "Kevin P. Fleming" Cc: linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] /sbin/hotplug multiplexor Message-ID: <20030414213405.GB5700@kroah.com> References: <20030414190032.GA4459@kroah.com> <200304142209.56506.oliver@neukum.org> <20030414203328.GA5191@kroah.com> <200304142311.01245.oliver@neukum.org> <3E9B2720.7020803@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E9B2720.7020803@cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 02:24:48PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > > Personally, this is one reason why I'd much rather see a daemon-based model > where each interested daemon can "subscribe" to the messages it is > interested in. It's very possible (and likely, i.e. udev) that the steps > involved for the daemon to respond to the hotplug event are so lightweight > that creating a subprocess to handle them would be very wasteful. One of the hotplug programs will create a D-BUS message that anyone can subscribe to. But I don't want to add that to one of the existing hotplug programs, as it's a separate task. That's one reason for the proposed change. thanks, greg k-h