Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 09 Sep 2009 22:33:31 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] char/tty_io: fix legacy pty name when more than 256 pty devices are requested |
| |
On 09/09/2009 09:13 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:46:01 -0700 > "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> escreveu: > >> Actually it's [7:4][*:8][3:0]. It was the easiest way to get backwards >> compatibility, since it allowed for the use of s[n]printf(). It's not >> by any means the only possibility, but I think the easiest one to describe. >> >>> From one side, I liked the idea of not having any arbitrary maximum limit, but >>> from other side, It seems easier to implement than to describe it in English, >>> at devices.txt. Maybe the solution is to explain it by examples. >>> >>> Also, if we look at the current device designation, we already have some rule >>> changes. >> >> That doesn't mean it's a good idea. > > True. Given the idea of using an unique algorithm to populate the namespace, I agree > that your proposal is a good alternative. > > I just sent the patch with the feedbacks I had. I tried to do my best to describe it in > simple yet precise terms at devices.txt. >
Looks good, except:
s/nibble/nybble/
"nybble" is to "nibble" what "byte" is to "bite".
-hpa
-- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
| |