On Feb 25, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Kay Sievers <kay@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hm, I thought we were frowning apon running binaries from udev rules >> these days, especially ones that might have big consequences (like >> resizing a disk image) like this. >> >> Kay, am I right? > > We removed most of them from the default setups, yes. But there is > nothing wrong if people want to ship that in some package or as custom > rules. > > It looks fine to me, we would just not add such things to the default > set of of rules these days. That was not my intention. I just wanted to demonstrate that event like this could be useful in cases like filesystem resize. We have a need for automatic resize by our customers so we will ship our custom udev rules. It's perfectly understandable that default udev rules will not have this. Milos > >> We already emit KOBJECT_CHANGE events when block devices change, from >> within the block core code. Why is the patch below needed instead of >> using these events that are already generated? How are virtio block >> devices special? > > I think we only do that for dm and md and a couple of special cases > like loop and read-only settings. > > 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
