Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: 2.5.26 hotplug failure

From: Greg KH (
Date: Sat Sep 21 2002 - 00:48:40 EST

On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 08:58:09PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 07:55:22PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> >
> >>How about a facility to create the character (or block?) special file
> >>node right there in the driverfs directory? Optional of course.
> >
> >
> >No, Linus has stated that this is not ok to do. See the lkml archives
> >for the whole discussion about this.
> I suspected that'd be the case. Some pointer into the archives
> would be good, though I'd suspect the basic summary is that it'd
> be too much like devfs that way. Did the same statement apply to
> adding some file that wasn't a device special file? That kind
> of solution moves in the "no majors/minors" direction, which I
> thought was the general goal. Leaves a naming policy debate,
> but one that ought to be more managable (say, with devlabel).

All naming policies are moving to userspace. It will not be a kernel

> Though I guess my original reaction still stands then: I don't
> much want to care about major/minor numbers, so why not just leave
> them out in favor of whatever better solution is the goal? Save
> everyone the intermediate steps!

No, we need the major/minor number to be in driverfs. That way the
userspace program (that's running the naming policy) can look at
driverfs to see what devices are present, what the major/minor number of
the device is, what type of device it is, and then create the /dev node
for the device, based on that information.

We are slowly getting there, and I don't see any intermediate steps
along the way (meaning ones that get ripped out later.)


greg k-h
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 : Mon Sep 23 2002 - 22:00:32 EST