Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:40:15 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] ndevfs - a "nano" devfs |
| |
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.
> 2) If you accept that, exporting the device names from the kernel is the > most sensible way to do it.
I don't accept it, and neither does anyone else. See my previous posts about devfs and udev for more details, I'm not going to go into this again...
Good luck,
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/
| |