Not sure what you're trying to say here. Devfs does this by accessing
a structure member. So there are no searches required. So it's true to
say that devfs doesn't have an index operation. That's because it
doesn't have a major array in the first place.
> Having a hash on a kdev_t behind it ain't so bad. Since we'll
> eventually need more device address space, and _mandatory_ devfs
> will almost certainly not happen, some scheme other than direct
> mapping needs to be created.
I agree. My point is just that devfs gives you the option of avoiding
this new overhead. Obviously, the current major table has to be
replaced.
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/