Re: [PATCH] 2.5.14 IDE 56

From: Linus Torvalds (
Date: Tue May 07 2002 - 13:46:06 EST

On Tue, 7 May 2002, Richard Gooch wrote:
> > Which may certainly be acceptable, of course.
> I wasn't suggesting a magic readlink(2). I was suggesting a *real*
> one. Device nodes get stored in the physical tree (what you call
> driverfs), and the entries in the logical tree are symlinks.


This is one backwards compatibility thing that I'm _not_ removing.

We have tons of existign /dev trees, and I'm not making them into

Also, you obviously haven't thought it through AT ALL. Hint: partitions.

If you have /dev/hda1, that _cannot_ be a symlink to the physical tree,
because on a physical level that partition DOES NOT EXIST. It's purely a
virtual mapping.

Yet clearly there _is_ a mapping from /dev/hda1 onto the physical device
in question, and clearly it _is_ a meaninful operation to operate on the
physical device underlying /dev/hda1.

So if you want to have a sane interface, you need to have a way to look up
the physical device that underlies /dev/hda1.

Yet it clearly cannot be a symlink.


So stop mixing up physical devices and /dev. They should NOT be handled by
the same mechanism.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 07 2002 - 22:00:30 EST