From: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Kyle Moffett <kyle@moffetthome.net>,
Pantelis Koukousoulas <pktoss@gmail.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: How to tell whether a struct file is held by a process?
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 17:21:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ac3eb2510905220821n629314c3tb113802f52abc67c@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905221051350.3006-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 17:12, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-22 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-19 16:57 Alan Stern
2009-05-21 9:52 ` Al Viro
2009-05-21 14:06 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-21 21:07 ` Kay Sievers
2009-05-21 21:27 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-22 13:30 ` Pantelis Koukousoulas
2009-05-22 13:38 ` Oliver Neukum
2009-05-22 13:43 ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22 13:52 ` Pantelis Koukousoulas
2009-05-22 14:12 ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22 14:29 ` Pantelis Koukousoulas
2009-05-21 22:14 ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22 1:28 ` Kyle Moffett
2009-05-22 9:53 ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22 15:12 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-22 15:20 ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22 16:04 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-22 16:23 ` Pantelis Koukousoulas
2009-05-22 18:19 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-22 15:21 ` Kay Sievers [this message]
2009-05-22 15:54 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-22 18:24 ` Kay Sievers
2009-05-22 18:48 ` Pantelis Koukousoulas
2009-05-22 19:31 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-22 21:54 ` Kay Sievers
2009-05-22 22:07 ` Alan Stern
2009-05-23 22:47 ` Kay Sievers
2009-05-22 8:36 ` Oliver Neukum
2009-05-21 22:22 ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22 12:26 ` Oliver Neukum
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ac3eb2510905220821n629314c3tb113802f52abc67c@mail.gmail.com \
--to=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=kyle@moffetthome.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pktoss@gmail.com \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®