| 1 |
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 03:55:45PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's |
| 4 |
> > time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently |
| 5 |
> > are living with[2]. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > To start with, the 061 version of udev offers a big memory savings if |
| 8 |
> > you use the "default" kernel name of a device[3]. If you do that, it does |
| 9 |
> > not create a file in its database in /dev/.udevdb/ |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > If we can move away from some of our devfs-like names, we stand to |
| 12 |
> > reclaim a lot of memory from everyone's machines. As an example, if we |
| 13 |
> > drop all of the tty/pts/vc/vcc symlinks, and just go with the default |
| 14 |
> > kernel name, we save 2.5Mb of space in tempfs/ramfs. I've done this on |
| 15 |
> > my machines and everything seems to work just fine (it looks like |
| 16 |
> > everything that was trying to use a tty node was just using the symlink |
| 17 |
> > anyway.) |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > So, anyone have any objections to me changing the default udev naming |
| 20 |
> > scheme in this manner? |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Fine with me. I assume we will need to keep the rcscript support for |
| 24 |
> those die-hard 2.4 users still, but hopefully we can eventually drop |
| 25 |
> that as well. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
What rcscript support? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> > Next up, that loony block device naming scheme (more on that later...) |
| 30 |
> > |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Heh. I hope that we will still at least just do the cdsymlinks stuff |
| 33 |
> (just the /dev/cdrom, /dev/dvd, etc stuff) as that do make things a bit |
| 34 |
> easier for multimedia stuff. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Yes, I don't see us dropping that, as it's just too useful :) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> > [3] HAL needs a patch to be able to handle this. It's posted on the |
| 39 |
> > hal development mailing lists and will be checked in real-soon-now. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> I just think we need to make sure this is in first ... |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
The HAL patch? It's now in HAL's cvs tree, don't know when they will do |
| 44 |
a new release. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
> Lastly on an unrelated note ... I have a rule: |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> ----- |
| 49 |
> # cat /etc/udev/rules.d/40-dm.rules |
| 50 |
> KERNEL="dm-[0-9]*", PROGRAM="/sbin/devmap_name %M %m", NAME="mapper/%c", SYMLINK="%c" |
| 51 |
> ----- |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> And in theory it should be the last rule to set the name ... however the |
| 54 |
> default one in 50-udev.rules overrides it, and I have to add |
| 55 |
> OPTIONS="last_rule" |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Yes. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Want me to just change the default rule to yours? |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
thanks, |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
greg k-h |
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives