Re: [PATCH] alternative dev patch

From: Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org)
Date: Sun Mar 23 2003 - 11:32:23 EST


On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 04:05:24PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> > Yeah, but as I know, it's a big pain in the butt. Let's make it easy to
> > do this, don't make writing a driver tougher than it has to be (it's
> > already much harder than it used to be.) Andries's patch makes it easy,
> > which is a good thing in my book.
>
> Andries' patch doesn't help at all and only makes things worse. Only very
> few drivers should have to deal with the major/minor business. Most
> drivers should just do add_serial_device/add_tape_device/... and these
> function will do the right thing (e.g. announce the new device via sysfs).

Yupp. The add_serial_device/add_tape_device/ would also have the benefit
that they could keept track of devfs like the gendisk handling when
GENHD_FL_DEVFS is set by the drivers - lots of cruft can be remove from
drivers and midlayers incrementally.

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 22:00:44 EST