Messages in this thread | | | From | Oliver Neukum <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] ndevfs - a "nano" devfs | Date | Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:00:08 +0200 |
| |
Am Dienstag, 28. Juni 2005 09:40 schrieb Greg KH: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 04:26:00PM -0700, Mike Bell wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 05:35:50PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > AFAIK there is no requirement in input subsystem that devices should be > > > created under /dev/input. When devfs is activated they are created there > > > by default, but that's it. > > > > Things which accept a path to an event file as an argument will work > > just fine. But anything which tries autodiscovery HAS to be able to find > > the device nodes. Think directfb, most (but not all) of the X patches, > > any user-space driver that wants to find the hardware it owns, etc. > > > > This illustrates nicely my reasons for preferring devfs. > > > > 1) Predictable, canonical device names are a Good Thing. > > And impossible for the kernel to generate given hotpluggable devices.
That is not true. The kernel can generate predictable device names. It just cannot generate _stable_ device names under all circumstances.
Regards Oliver - 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/
| |