Re: >256 ptys (previous subject line was garbage)
Richard Gooch (Richard.Gooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU)
Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:45:23 +1000
tytso@mit.edu writes:
> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:56:12 +1000
> From: Richard Gooch <Richard.Gooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU>
>
> > Isn't the devfs supposed to allow major/minor-less devices? I seem to
> > recall that for some devices major/minor number were used anywas since
> > userland code used it (mounted filesystems e.g.). For ptys this should be
> > no problem.
>
> Devfs does allows major/minor-less devices. You could hack the tty
> driver to make use of this. Check out the devfs FAQ at:
> http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~rgooch/linux/devfs.txt
>
> This is actually a bad thing, since there's been a lot of talk about
> using major/minor numbers as part of a tty locking scheme.
Well, you don't actually *have* to get rid of major/minor
numbers. Devfs also allows you to have automatic allocation of device
numbers as well as supporting normal hard-wired major/minor numbers.
In the devfs FAQ I propose automatic device number allocation for SCSI
and tty devices. This would give us up to 64k SCSI partitions and tty
devices without breaking userspace.
BTW: what is this tty locking scheme?
Regards,
Richard....
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu