On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:39:45 -0600 Jason Gunthorpe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 08:35:09AM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > > > From: Jason Gunthorpe [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > > Using open/close is an interesting idea, but it wouldn't work. open() > > > is coded to return EBUSY if another process has it open, rather than > > > block, and spinning on open would be unacceptable. > > > > Hmm, maybe write a small pass through program which opens /dev/tpm > > once and accepts its data via a socket or pipe? > > I believe the kernel should not be enforcing this kind of policy into > userspace. Plus, some of our embedded system are memory constrained > so an unnecessary process is not welcome.. Sane device drivers for devices where contention is meaningful block on an open that is busy, or return an error if the O_NONBLOCK option is specified. That's the normal case. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
