On Thu, Apr 13, 2000, Stephen Frost <sfrost@mail.snowman.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2000, Stephen Frost <sfrost@mail.snowman.net> wrote:
> > > Heh, of course, there's the question of: can you *get* the
> > > information. I have no clue if you can or not, but I'm curious, *can*
> > > you get the serial number of a mouse? Does that work for any ps/2
> > > mouse? Just curious. If you can't, well, it don't make no difference
> > > if they're unique. :)
> >
> > PS/2 mice don't have that information. USB devices have the capability
> > to, but all of the mice I've seen, don't have serial numbers.
>
> Okay, well, just kind of FYI, I don't want a USB mouse plugged in
> on some random machine on my network to control the pointer on another
> machine on my network. :) The same goes for ps/2, and in general
> filesystems as well.
Heh, I wouldn't want that either.
> Now, if you want data on a partition on another machine, it would
> be nice to get that information. That, however, is in general a userspace
> issue. Sure, the kernel can provide information that makes sense to
> provide to user space about a given device, but the kernel shouldn't be
> out hunting down filesystems to mount locally.
> I would have thought the kernel would provide information to
> userspace about a device (physical attributes, where the filesystem is
> physically), and that userspace can then figure out what it wants to do
> w/ it. If it wants to use UUID, physical location, MAC address, what have
> you, it can, it's userspace. The kernel shouldn't be defining these things,
> the kernel should just be telling you where it is *physically*. devfs,
> mostly I think, tells you where it is physically. That's fine, userspace
> can then use that info to figure out what to do w/ it. Userspace can
> also go figure out other things about whatever it is to determine where
> to mount it, or symlink it, or change permissions, etc, etc, etc.
> My thought is simply this, the kernel shouldn't be looking up in
> tables and whatnot where to mount something, that isn't its problem. It
> has some useful info about a device that just showed up, it needs to pass
> that info to userspace so userspace can go do something about that device
> showing up.
> The interface between the kernel and userspace is where things are
> getting hung-up, I think. It used to be major,minor numbers. Now we have
> the option of devfs. Well, devfs is nice because it gives us a larger
> address space, but at the same time it's introduced some confusion as to
> what the kernel should be doing and what userspace should be handling.
> So, let's get back to figuring out how the kernel should be talking
> to userspace about devices and quit w/ the grand ideas for the userspace
> half, if someone finds it useful, they'll implement it. :)
What's wrong with the current devfsd protocol?
Most of the objections I've seen center around devfs as a VFS, but not
necessarily devfsd.
JE
-
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 - 21:00:23 EST