Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Feb 2000 07:03:16 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: [patch-2.3.46-p2] P6 microcode update support |
| |
H. Peter Anvin writes: > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > Ok, the final patch I've seen looks ok, > > > > ... BUT ... > > > > I think we shoul dstart getting rid of /dev files for random new devices. > > > > I'd MUCH rather just see a /proc/sys/xxx file, which has the advantage of > > (a) needing no user-level setup (b) not having major/minor number issues > > and (c) making it trivial to see if the kernel has the microcode update > > support or not. > > > > Special character devices are a weakness of UNIX, not a strength. We have > > enough of them already. If they are virtual devices, then give them a > > virtual interface.. > > If so, I would rather say we should go with something like devfs > rather than overloading /proc. It has exactly the same problems -- > mainly, the lack of cleanly done persistent permissions -- but devfs > at least *tries* to solve this problem.
Peter! Friend! ;-)
I must say I agree. I would like to see /proc eventually have only *process* information, and move all those device files in /proc to devfs.
When I get the time, I'll be adding persistence to devfs (by tunnelling through to the mounted-over FS). Right now devfsd provides a hook to save permissions.
BTW: the microcode device should be in /dev/cpu/microcode. If you look at the devfs patch, you'll notice that /dev/cpu/ is already defined.
Regards,
Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |