[lkml]   [1999]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: USB device allocation
On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> David Weinehall wrote:
> >
> > Oh, and have you actually ever tried a system running devfs (such as a
> > kernel patched with Richard Gooch' patch, or a Solaris-system), or?
> >
> > Hmmm. If USB isn't enough to convince, think about USB2 (128 devices/bus
> > if I'm not all wrong), FireWire, FibreChannel, SCSI-III, etc. Sooner or
> > later we need a solution to the problem with devices. And devfs is a very
> > good, thought-through, proven to work (been used in Solaris for many
> > years) and backward-compatible solution. And it's available now.
> >
> Solaris does *not* use devfs; the /devices tree is an on-disk device
> node tree which is constructed at initialization time, and it is
> persistent. A much better solution, IMNSHO.

Why is that? You get the same layout with a dynamic-filesystem; the
difference is that with dynamic devices it becomes FAR easier to support
plug'n'play devices.

/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> </ Full colour fire </

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.139 / U:20.280 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site