Re: PROPOSAL: /proc/dev

James Mastros (root@jennifer-unix.dyn.ml.org)
Thu, 1 Jan 1998 02:31:58 -0500 (EST)


On Wed, 31 Dec 1997, Dan Hollis wrote:
> Someone's already specced out a linuxfs at
>
> http://www.cs.uml.edu/~acahalan/linux/devfs.html
>
Thank you: They already solved the problem of loading kernel modules more
elegantly then Richard Gooch or I:

# Loadable modules
#
# Currently when an access to a /dev file occurs, and the driver associated
# with the major/minor numbers doesn't exist, the kernel kerneld to load
# it. This scheme won't work with missing dev. If we create a specific
# proc_lookup wrapper (like in root.c) for dev directory and cater for the
# case ENOENT to request_module. That needs to be done would be an
# interface to enable modules (compiled in drivers) to register themselves
# with the kernel with to be placed in dev, eg floppy.o could register fd0,
# fd0...
#
# An advantage with this is that you would only have dev entries for
# devices you currently have loaded.
#
# The devfs can do module requests by name.
[really big sic]

(We would have to surpress negitive dentries, but that's easy.)

> Someone's already written code :-) at
>
> http://www.linuxhq.com/patch/20-p0814.html
BTW - Off-by-one error there.

I'm not really shure how much I like this... it uses calbacks for a
userspace policy daemon, which I definatly don't like (for the same reason
as hpa)...

> -Dan

-=- James Mastros

-- 
Information as a base of power is coming to an end.  In the way the world
works tomorrow, the power to *do* *something* *with* *information* is what
will matter. 

-=- James Mastros, rephrasing Nugget (David McNett, distributed.net Big Man)