Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:45:23 +0300 | From | Eduard-Gabriel Munteanu <> | Subject | Dynamic major/minor numbers (or dropping them completely) |
| |
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(r) Pro* Currently, the kernel has the following properties: 1) initramfs can be used to boot the system. We don't need any predefined /dev entries. 2) udev can be started from the initramfs to create the required entries in /dev. udev doesn't care about major/minor numbers. 3) Most distros already use udev and maybe initramfs. If there are exceptions, they can be easily converted.
For the first part, I'm asking: is there any reason why new char/block drivers shouldn't use dynamic major/minor numbers? Is there any reason against converting the whole kernel to dynamic major/minor numbers?
Okay, maybe the previous questions looked useless from a pragmatic POV. But why shouldn't the whole major/minor numbering system be dropped completely? sysfs already maintains a hierachy of device drivers and kernel subsystems, one which is better than the major/minor system. The current system could be replaced by a single-numbered, dynamically-allocated scheme.
Device files could be stored on a tmpfs filesystem, so that we don't make any changes to current filesystems. Apps won't need to be modified, since they access /dev entries by name, provided udev maintains the current naming scheme.
Any thoughts on this? - 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/
| |