lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PROPOSAL: /proc/dev
On Tue, Jan 06, 1998 at 10:46:06AM -0800, david parsons wrote:
> In article <linux.kernel.199801060945.UAA27719@vindaloo.atnf.csiro.au>,
> Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU> wrote:
>
> >Nope: if CONFIG_DEVFS is enabled then drivers can only be accessed
> >through devfs and symlinks to devfs.
>
> Ick. This screams of enforcing policy; if someone wanted to update a
> physical /dev from a devfs /devices (boot the machine, mount /devices,
> update /dev from the contents of /devices, unmount /devices), they'd be
> out of luck. And is it really worth the trouble to clutter up the
> kernel ensuring that people can't do this (and what about device drivers
> that have not been updated to populate a devfs; will support for them be
> dropped, subject to someone going back and eventually coding this change
> in?)

OK, then make it that the restriction above applies only when devfs is
mounted. If it is not mounted then allow devices elsewhere. BUT what would
they be? Which major/minors would you use?

I would have thought that once devfs exists, normal devices stop working.
--
[======================================================================]
[ Kevin Lentin Email: K.Lentin@cs.monash.edu.au ]
[ finger kevinl@fangorn.cs.monash.edu.au for PGP public key block. ]
[ KeyId: 06808EED FingerPrint: 6024308DE1F84314 811B511DBA6FD596 ]
[======================================================================]

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.049 / U:0.812 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site