> By the way, the majorstruct also has a field pointing to a function
> with a kdev_t argument that returns the name of the device,
> to be used in error messages.
Just a thought (Havn't gone back to read the other things yet,
but this caught my eye), wouldn't it make more sense to have either
both majorstruct and minorstruct have the name of the device, or just
minorstruct (Assuming it knows what majorstruct it belongs to)? My
feeling on this mainly is that you want to know EXACTLY what device
failed when a failure occurs.
Example: From glances at my /dev/sd* it looks like SCSI HDs
belong to major 8, then /dev/sda* is 0-15, /dev/sdb* is 16-31, and so
on. When I get an error, I'd want more info than just some SCSI HD
died, if possible.
Though, okay, you could give me the minor number that failed,
but if you're doing that, why not just give me the major number as
well instead of the string? Either way I'll have to consult my device
map to figure out what actually happened.
Now of course, if you tell me the major,minor as things
currently are, then what happens when those get reassigned when you
reboot (As scsi is)? One way to handle this is to put the hardware
info into the string, but then, if the string is static, how can you
specify what scsi ID you're talking about with just the major?
I imagine this is all handled somehow and I'm just not seeing
it, just that accurate error reporting is VERY important to me.. :)
Stephen
-
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/