From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 16 16:53:34 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5437716A515 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arginine.spc.org (arginine.spc.org [195.206.69.236]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747244423E for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:27:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bms@spc.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D216530D for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:27:25 +0100 (BST) Received: from arginine.spc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arginine.spc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07779-01 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:27:25 +0100 (BST) Received: from saboteur.dek.spc.org (unknown [81.3.72.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D2B165285 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:27:25 +0100 (BST) Received: by saboteur.dek.spc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 41C9110; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:27:24 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:27:24 +0100 From: Bruce M Simpson To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20030916232724.GG3052@saboteur.dek.spc.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Organization: SPC Subject: devd limitations / automounting removable storage X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:53:36 -0000 Hi, I noticed that when I attach a USB key fob, I don't get a devd message to say e.g. 'da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0'. Any objections to adding devd notifications to the CAM layer? It would allow us to automount such devices. Specifically I'm thinking that a program to change the running automounter map could be used. Of course, filesystems which could be removed at any time would have to use synchronous I/O completion and preferably a log-structured filesystem (see recent fsync/msdosfs bug and ohci problems). What do people think? Perhaps we could extrapolate this to when CDs are inserted into drives (one for Soren...) BMS