Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:34:28 -0800 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: State of devfs in 2.6? |
| |
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 12:04:08AM +0100, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote: > On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:50:45 +0000, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > I would say it's deprecated at the very least. sysfs and udev are > > supposed to provide equivalent functionality, albeit by a somewhat > > different mechanism. > > huh? > > aj@simulacron:/dev$ find -type c -mount |grep -v pty |wc -l > 164 > aj@simulacron:/dev$ find -type b |wc -l > 157 > aj@simulacron:/dev$ find /sys/ -name dev |wc -l > 250 > > After ignoring .devfsd we are left with 70 devices missing: > - 15 floppy devices
You have 15 floppy devices connected to your box? All floppy devices should show up in /sys/block.
> - 5 input/ devices
Patch for sysfs support for this has been posted by Hanna Linder. It still needs work before being added to the kernel tree.
> - full, kmem, kmsg, mem, null, port, random, urandom, zero
Patch for this has been posted by me to lkml in the past. It will probably go into 2.6.1
> - printers/0
Hanna Linder is working on a patch for these devices.
> - 5 misc/ devices
Patch for this has been posted by me to lkml in the past. It will probably go into 2.6.1.
> - 12 snd/ devices > - 5 sound/ devices
I have a patch here from Leann Ogasawara that adds sysfs support for these devices. I've been lacking time to test it better, but again, it will probably make it into 2.6.1.
> - 18 vcc/ devices
Hm, good catch. I wonder why these aren't getting picked up in /sys/class/tty as they are tty devices. I thought they used to be there...
> I wouldn't call udev deprecated, unless a newer kernel has the > essential devices, too.
You mean s/udev/devfs/ right? :)
> And is there a udev version that can > do devfs names? last time I checked only lanana names were supported.
There is a udev config file that was just posted to linux-hotplug-devel that supports a lot of devfs names. If there are any missing that you use, please post a config file for them.
Remember, I don't use devfs, so I really don't care about a udev mapping for it :)
> Some distributions were quite happy to move from /dev and lanana to > devfs with better names.
Hm, 2? And one of them (Mandrake) got smart and went back...
> I doubt everyone will rush to udev with lanana names,
Why not? It's the standard afterall. Remember, the devfs users are in the tiny minority here.
> and > re-introducing makedev for devices not represented > in sysfs doesn't sound very nice either. So 2.8.* might be a nice time > frame for dropping devfs, or at least give sysfs and udev a few months > to catch up on the issues mentioned.
Regardless of the state of udev, devfs has insolvable problems and you should not use it. End of story.
thanks,
greg k-h - 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/
| |