mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>
To: Fabien Sanglard <sanglardf@google.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: core: Emit KOBJ_CHANGE on unbound interface
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 10:01:24 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f86ca4e0-b294-42cb-b51a-d9e9984544ef@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA92w6=OhNYXF_kQFV4tPKa19xdWRkdQbFXaqhdxfqW4N9zMVg@mail.gmail.com>

Good morning,

On 13.10.26 18:48, Fabien Sanglard wrote:

> That said, unifying the behavior upon reset would be elegant. My main
> concern is whether some existing udev rules or netlink listeners in
> user space might break if we generalize this behavior and start
> emitting unexpected CHANGE events for interfaces that successfully
> rebound (which already emit UNBIND -> BIND).

On a generic note, it seems to me that you are concerned about
an unavoidable case. You can check whether an interface is
unclaimed. Yet you have no way to ensure that the result of
your check is still current and thus valid, at time you act
upon it.

In other words, you were about to design an interface that is
inherently racy. That is not a good idea.
If you really, really need to avoid it, you'd have to define
a new type of event.

	Regards
		Oliver


      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-10-21  8:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <b7c2f7d1-40fd-4d83-8ced-5fc27e3be051@rowland.harvard.edu>
2026-10-12 17:16 ` Fabien Sanglard
2026-10-13  9:34   ` Oliver Neukum
2026-10-13 16:48     ` Fabien Sanglard
2026-10-14  5:01       ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-10-21  8:01       ` Oliver Neukum [this message]

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=f86ca4e0-b294-42cb-b51a-d9e9984544ef@suse.com \
    --to=oneukum@suse.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sanglardf@google.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    /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®