On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > The real problem seems to be that the device is reachable in two different > > ways, and they don't implement proper mutual exclusion. HAL (or your test > > program) is undoubtedly using /dev/sr0 or something similar, whereas > > cdrecord uses /dev/sg0. Going through two different drivers, it's no > > surprise they wind up interfering with each other. > > HAL is /dev/host0/.../cd
That goes through the sr driver. > cdrecord is -dev=0,0,0 (whatever Linux device file this translates into) > or a similar device ID as returned by -scanbus. That goes through the sg driver. > Probably (stating the obvious here, I'm afraid) we should only send > non-ALLOW_MEDIUM_REMOVAL for the *very first* device open, > and then send ALLOW_MEDIUM_REMOVAL after the *very last* device close only. > > So you think that with sr and sg drivers both talking to the device, > proper inter-driver device tracking is not doable or quite difficult > to implement? Well, it's not being done now. I suspect it wouldn't be too difficult technically. The hardest part might be to obtain the agreement of the SCSI and CDROM developers. :-) Alan Stern All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk! Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
