On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 12:10:06PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 09:04 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 12:22:47PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > > I consider myself an active member of udev upstream, and I think we've > > > taken a wrong turn with the design and implementation. > > > > What specifically do you mean by this? > > > > Is the current libudev not a good design for your needs? What should it > > be instead? > > > Actually, quite the opposite! I think that libudev is a great design. > > I think that the wrong turn is that we rely on a massive "cold plug" > phase during boot, and we rely on probing every single piece of hardware > during that phase or on later insertion - whether or not anything on the > system actually cares about the result. But how would we "know" if we care about a device until we actually figure out what the device is, and load the driver for it? This cold-plug phase doesn't seem to take a very large amount of time these days at all, so I don't see the real savings that would be possible here. Or am I missing something? thanks, greg k-h -- 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
