On Fri, 8 May 2009, Kay Sievers wrote: > You mentioned earlier, that you would need to match the holder of the > "lock" and the one that accesses the device? Yes. That is, a process shouldn't be allowed to access a locked device unless that process is the lock holder. > Wouldn't it be sufficient already, if you can take a "lock" at the > specific port, that prevents the kernel to access the device when it > shows up? I don't know how the people requesting this feature would feel about that. They seem to want to lock out other processes as well as locking out the kernel. > You thought of supporting a number of different users, with different > uids, or would that be a root-only action? A typical use case would be somebody running an emulator like QEMU. In theory there could be multiple QEMU processes running concurrently, each owning a different set of ports. The uids might be different or they might all be the same. Setting the lock permissions would be up to userspace. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
