lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectAn idea on devfs vs. udev
Date

Disclaimer: My knowledge about devfs/udev/sysfs is superficial, all the
following text maybe nonsense. In case, please ignore it, complain, insult
me, whatever you prefer, I'm not going to be offended :)


I see /dev as an abstraction layer above /sys, where udev implements the
abstraction. udev takes information from /sys and "translates" it to device
files organized in a nice way, following several policies configured on the
system.

Embedded people say "We don't need that kind of abstraction, we are ok with
working at the lower level".

So, why cannot we substitute the "dev" file within /sys with the actual device
file?

udev could continue to work in the same fashion, just stat(2)ing the file,
instead of parsing its contents.

embedded software could directly access the device file in /sys following a
path that is often meaningful and persistant between reboots.

This is *not* meant to be alternative to udev, just a possibility for people
who cannot run hotplug/udev and still want to access dynamic devices and are
prepared to adapt their software and libraries to another scheme.

Bye,

--
Daniele Orlandi
-
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: 2005-10-30 19:10    [W:1.972 / U:0.620 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site