From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 28 16:49:45 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A24F16A4E2 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:49:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from srv1.cosmo-project.de (srv1.cosmo-project.de [213.83.6.106]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5577843D39 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:49:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: from cicely5.cicely.de (cicely5.cicely.de [10.1.1.7]) (authenticated bits=0)j2SGnfsf001488 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK); Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:49:42 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: from cicely12.cicely.de (cicely12.cicely.de [IPv6:3ffe:400:8d0:301::12]) by cicely5.cicely.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j2SGn7VK088930 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:49:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: from cicely12.cicely.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cicely12.cicely.de (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j2SGn7YH028428; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:49:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely12.cicely.de) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by cicely12.cicely.de (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j2SGn6VF028427; Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:49:06 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from ticso) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:49:06 +0200 From: Bernd Walter To: Scott Long Message-ID: <20050328164906.GM14532@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <34230.1112027190@critter.freebsd.dk> <424830AC.7090309@samsco.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <424830AC.7090309@samsco.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD cicely12.cicely.de 5.2-CURRENT alpha User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no version=2.64 X-Spam-Report: * -4.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0023] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on cicely12.cicely.de cc: "current@freebsd.org" cc: vova@fbsd.ru cc: "Matthew N. Dodd" cc: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org cc: Poul-Henning Kamp cc: Julian Elischer cc: ticso@cicely.de Subject: Re: Reattach/redetect allways connected umass device - is it possible ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: ticso@cicely.de List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:49:45 -0000 On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 09:28:28AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >In message <42481C66.7090409@samsco.org>, Scott writes: > > > > > >>So are you saying that an async notification mechanism needs to be > >>invented for SCSI, or that all SCSI users should be required to use > >>SES or SAFTE enclosures for all SCSI devices, or that we should be like > >>Windows and constantly poll the devices? > > > > > >I don't care _how_ we make CAM/SCSI behave like the users expect. > > > > Well, I waved my hands at it for a few minutes, but nothing changed... > hmm.... =-) > > My question to you was partially rhetorical, since a good solution just > doesn't exist. Even the polling option isn't good because it will > disrupt things like burning CD's; in Windows, the CD burning software > packages that are out there go through an impressive set of hoops to > deal with this polling problem. What exactly is the problem with burning and polling? I personaly could easily imagine a kernel thread that polls devices e.g. once every second. It is out of question IMO that we need an async change notification framework somehow. -- B.Walter BWCT http://www.bwct.de bernd@bwct.de info@bwct.de