On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 22:46, Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think the patch breaks the settle control message. It now sends the > signal back to udevadm immediately, instead of postponing it until after > handle_inotify(), which was apparently the point. > Perhaps it would be simplest to reorder the main loop so that handle_ctrl() > comes after handle_inotify(). If I'm right, it could benefit from a comment > pointing out that this order is significant and should be preserved. Yeah, that sounds good. Thanks! > That said, I don't completely understand the settle control message. I > don't get why udevadm-settle only sends it once at the start, instead of > incorporating it as part of the delay loop. I think, it's only needed to cover the delayed wakeup of udevd. When no event is pending after close() of a device file, there is nothing we can miss after that point, I think. Thanks, Kay -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
