On 03/19/2017 01:36 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: > On 3/15/17 11:04 AM, Rick Stevens wrote: >> On 03/14/2017 02:27 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: >>> On 3/15/17 3:25 AM, Tom Horsley wrote: >>>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:43:45 -0700 >>>> Rick Stevens wrote: >>>> >>>>> Like I said, it's damned difficult to come up with something. If you >>>>> have a better idea, then submit it to the various kernel groups. >>>> I do have a better idea: Go back to the way it was when you could >>>> use udev to permanently assign names to interfaces :-). >>>> >>>> As you have just shown it is impossible to get it "right" but >>>> before they "fixed" it, you could at least get it to remain >>>> consistent with the udev rules. >>>> >>>> Stop trying to solve impossible problems. >>> I have several questions around the naming convention. >>> >>> My usb wireless adapter is named wlp3s0u2, hence the naming convention >>> is saying the adapter is usb device 3. I do have 3 usb devices >>> connected. Two of the devices are usb 2 and the adapter is usb 3, hence >>> when the device enumeration is done to determine what exists, what >>> controls whether usb 2 devices are enumerated first , is it software or >>> the motherboard? >> Remember, we're talking about network interfaces here and the naming >> conventions we've been discussing here ONLY affects network interfaces. > So am I. I thought the naming convention of 'u2' indicated that the wifi > adapter was the third usb device (which makes sense because I do have 3 > usb devices plugged in to the machine) hence what determined the adapter > was the third usb device, given that I would have thought the usb 3 > interfaces would have been polled for device discovery before the usb 2 > interfaces. But having said this the fact that the device name changed > to 'u1' when I plugged the device into the other cable connected usb 3 > slot indicates that the 'u' part of the name is the usb slot number not > the device number. >> >>> Assuming the naming convention is based on enumeration >>> which it may not be given that, I have 2 usb 3 slots on the front of my >>> machine and, if on the running system I unplug my wireless adapter and >>> plug it into the second slot, when the system recognizes the device >>> again the name changes to wlp3s0u1. Also I have 2 usb 2 slots on the >>> front of my machine, and if I do the same thing to my adapter and unplug >>> it from the usb 3 slot and plug it into the second usb 2 slot the name >>> changes to wlp0s19f2u3, hence what does the naming convention actually >>> represent? >> I'm not sure. It sounds like all the USB hubs in your machine interface >> through PCI slot 3. I would have expected that the various hubs would >> have different "s" numbers (e.g. one hub on p3s0, one on p3s1, etc.). > What you expected to be the situation is the case between the usb 2 and > usb 3 ports, they are on different pci slots, at least according to the > naming convention. But what I don't understand is why the vastly > different name when the device is plugged into a usb 2 slot, I would > have expected the name to be wlp0s19u3. I fully understand that a usb 3 > device plugged into a usb 2 port is going to lose functionality, but why > does the naming convention need to specify that, and what functionality > does the 'f2' indicate is being provided by the device? I can't answer why the "f2" appears. My interpretations are based on what I recall was explained when this whole "NIC-named-after-PCI-bus- scanning" thing started with (I think it was) kernel V2.6 or V3.x. Can't recall, it was a long time ago, I'm getting old and my brain is getting full. :-) >>> As I said above I have 3 usb devices, the other 2 are a keyboard and the >>> transmitter for my wireless mouse. How do I find what the naming >>> convention for those two devices is, in terms of what they are actually >>> named? >> They'd show up in the dmesg log, but they will NOT be named things like >> "wlp3". Again, that's just for wireless NICs. I have a Logitech wireless >> keyboard and mouse and this is how they appear in dmesg: >> >> [ 2.556799] logitech 0003:046D:C517.0001: input,hidraw1: USB HID >> v1.10 Keyboard [Logitech USB Receiver] on usb-0000:00:14.0-5/input0 >> [ 2.608866] logitech 0003:046D:C517.0002: input,hiddev0,hidraw2: USB >> HID v1.10 Mouse [Logitech USB Receiver] on usb-0000:00:14.0-5/input1 >> >>> Lastly, if I plug a flash driver into the usb 3 slot where my wireless >>> adapter was what name does it inherit and how do I find out? >> It would most likely be /dev/sdX, where "X" was the next sequential disk >> number available at the time you plugged the device in. > I was under the impression from other responses to this thread that all > devices had a standard naming convention, which I thought was similar to > the network device naming convention, hence, if my impression was > correct, what is that naming convention for other devices? > > This also leads me down another path, if I plug into my machine my flash > disk, my digital SLR camera and my digital video camera, the flask disk > is auto mounted under /media and the other two are auto mounted under > /run, why are they all not mounted under /media or /run, and, what > determines where they will be mounted and what is different between them > that causes them to be mounted differently? Well, the flash disk is identified by the system as a mass storage device. By default definition, mass storage devices are automounted under "/media" (since, well, that's what they are...media). Your cameras don't generally use a standard disk-style interface and aren't considered mass storage devices per se, so they get auto mounted under "/run" (since there's usually some middleware such as "mtpfs" between the camera and the kernel). Automounting is generally handled by your desktop environment, not udev itself. udev sees the insertion, sends out a "gee, I see a new device" DBUS message, which your desktop manager picks up and either ignores or does whatever it's configured to do. Theoretically, you can go into your desktop config and tell it to automount your cameras under "~/fradleybard" and it'll do it (assuming you have a "fradleybard" directory under your home directory and it's writable). I personally don't like automounts and don't have them enabled (I use XFCE and this is controlled under "Applications->Settings->Removable Drives and Media"). > I also apologize for all the questions, I'm just trying to understand > how the distribution works under the covers so that I can better manage > my system. Not a problem...questions and answers are the entire reason to have mailing lists like this. Keep in mind that I'm quite possibly one of the least qualified people to speak on these subjects. I've been doing computer crudola for 45 years and I've seen a lot of stuff go flying by during that time. I am NOT currently a kernel developer, nor have I had anything to do with the design or implementation of any of the desktop environments. I'm a systems/network/storage architect and engineer with >20 years of programming experience to go along with it. To wit, I'm just a user--perhaps longer standing with more experience than many, but just a user. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 - - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
