Non-idempotent RUN+= scripts

There are cases where a RUN+= script needs to do something exactly once each time a device appears, such as binding a different driver to the device. If the udev rule matches based on a property (such as PCI device information) that is set only by the kernel, is it okay to use ACTION=="add" in the rule? The only other options I know of are to either 1. Add additional code to the script to make sure it is idempotent. This might require adding a lock. 2. Use a persistent daemon. Which of these approaches is best? -- Sincerely, Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)