[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] New Driver Model for 2.5 (Tim Jansen)  wrote on 20.10.01 in <>:

> On Friday 19 October 2001 22:24, you wrote:

> > > Ok, but I think no one doubts that it is a bad idea to assign ethX
> > > semi-randomly. Basically this is the same problem as with device files,
> > > only in a different namespace.
> > So is that in favor of changing the current ethX naming convention or not?
> I don't know. You don't need a device file for networking, but if there is
> some mechanism to allow stable names it would certainly be good to use it
> for network, too.

You need stable identifiers, but those identifiers don't need to be the
usual names, as long as you have a way to find out which identifier goes
with which name dynamically.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:08    [W:0.063 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site