Re: devfs - why not ?

From: Richard Gooch (rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca)
Date: Wed Apr 12 2000 - 19:33:16 EST


H. Peter Anvin writes:
> Richard Gooch wrote:
> > >
> > > So instead there are 520 separate chunks of kernel memory... a
> > > device driver I'm hacking on right now is about 3x the size with
> > > devfs support than without
> >
> > I find that really hard to believe. You'd have to make an awful lot of
> > calls to devfs functions to increase the code that much.
> >
> > > (not to mention I can't find any documentation on the devfs kernel
> > > API, so I just gave up.)
> >
> > So if you gave up, how do you know it's 3x bigger?
>
> I didn't get it to work in the end. I looked at the code size of
> the nonfunctional version.

I'd be interested to see what you did.

> > The API is documented in fs/devfs/base.c in a format designed to be
> > automatically extracted.
>
> The Documentation subdirectory is there for a reason.

Sure, but I firmly believe that API documentation (at the function
reference level) should be embedded into the code. Otherwise it's more
likely that the documentation ages.

                                Regards,

                                        Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au
Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:20 EST