Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Aug 1998 16:43:37 -0500 (CDT) | From | Shawn Leas <> | Subject | Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???) |
| |
On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > You mean like... > > > > c0b0t0u0p1 and rc0b0t0u0p1? This would be better WITH DevFS, than > > without... > > Its got nothing to do with devFS. Its means I want to RW to a device > without the buffer cache getting in the way. > > For many applications, this is a bad thing - but for large database > which maintain their own caches, etc. it can be a big win.
It has a lot to do with having twice the number of dev files around adding to the directory entry lookup tim, though.
This is all I meant by it being better *with* DevFS than without. Any time you increase the number of possible device nodes, you have increased administrative overhead in /dev without it, too.
-Shawn <=========== America Held Hostage ===========> Day 2023 for the poor and the middle class. Day 2042 for the rich and the dead. 899 days remaining in the Raw Deal. <============================================>
- 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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |