H. Peter Anvin writes:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Ok, the final patch I've seen looks ok,
> >
> > ... BUT ...
> >
> > I think we shoul dstart getting rid of /dev files for random new devices.
> >
> > I'd MUCH rather just see a /proc/sys/xxx file, which has the advantage of
> > (a) needing no user-level setup (b) not having major/minor number issues
> > and (c) making it trivial to see if the kernel has the microcode update
> > support or not.
> >
> > Special character devices are a weakness of UNIX, not a strength. We have
> > enough of them already. If they are virtual devices, then give them a
> > virtual interface..
>
> If so, I would rather say we should go with something like devfs
> rather than overloading /proc. It has exactly the same problems --
> mainly, the lack of cleanly done persistent permissions -- but devfs
> at least *tries* to solve this problem.
Peter! Friend! ;-)
I must say I agree. I would like to see /proc eventually have only
*process* information, and move all those device files in /proc to
devfs.
When I get the time, I'll be adding persistence to devfs (by
tunnelling through to the mounted-over FS). Right now devfsd provides
a hook to save permissions.
BTW: the microcode device should be in /dev/cpu/microcode. If you look
at the devfs patch, you'll notice that /dev/cpu/ is already defined.
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 : Wed Feb 23 2000 - 21:00:15 EST