andrew.grover@intel.com said:
> If a device can be accessed by multiple machines concurrently, it
> should not be in driverfs.
On that argument, we'll eliminate almost all Fibre Channel devices!
I think the qualification for appearing in driverfs is actually possessing a
driver. Therefore, we accept FC and iSCSI. Things which appear as
FileSystems are debatable, but not anything which has a real device driver.
> We need a device tree to do PM. If driverfs's PM capabilities are hurt
> because it doesn't stay true to that, then the featureitis has gone
> too far.
Perhaps it's more a question of whether power management belongs as an every
unit item in driverfs. As you say, we get problems where the device is shared
between multiple computers.
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 30 2002 - 22:00:08 EST