On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 21:07, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 09:03:21PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: > >> Sure, but what's wrong with reading that file every 50 seconds? Almost >> all boxes poll for media changes of optical drives and usb card >> readers anyway, so it's not that we are not doing stuff like this >> already. > > We poll for media because there's no event-based way of avoiding it - in > this case there is. That's true, but I think there is a significant difference between polling every one or two seconds for media changes, and usually one or two minutes for a disk idle. It's not that we poll in a rather hight frequency, in an arbitrary interval, and check if some condition is met. I still don't think that we should add new event interfaces which are single-subscriber only, and use global values for a specific user. What if there will be another independent user for this, which might want a different timeout? They fight over the trigger value to set in sysfs? >From my perspective, the once-at-timeout wakeup is more acceptable than an in-kernel policy setting for a single-subscriber event interface. 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
