lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: no ioctls for serial ports? [was Re: LANANA: To Pending DeviceNum


On Mon, 21 May 2001, Oliver Xymoron wrote:

> K - so what? I'm guessing what you want me to see is that these
> implement multiple channels. Is there a reason that eia001stat couldn't be
> implemented as
>
> f=open("/dev/eia001ctl",O_RDWR);
> write(f,"stat\n");
> status=read(f); /* returns "stat foo\n" */

Less convenient.

> We don't want to implement a separate device node for every OOB ioctl that
> returns data, do we? Why should stat be any different?

For every? Probably not. Forcing all of them together? I bet that in many
cases it will be damn inconvenient. You are forcing the policy on all
drivers. For no good reason, AFAICS.

> /dev/draw is interesting but largely irrelevant. And again, colormap and
> refresh - why are they not part of ctl? You've got to select on refresh
> anyway, might as well accept asynchronous messages through ctl.

You've got to do _what_ on refresh?

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:53    [W:0.182 / U:1.220 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site