Subject: Re: 32 bit dev_t, Revision 3
To: Matt Thomas <email@example.com>
From: Todd Vierling <tv@NetBSD.ORG>
Date: 01/12/1998 06:09:19
On Sun, 11 Jan 1998, Matt Thomas wrote:
: I'm going for a semi-radical change when we do this:
: Can we change bdevsw/cdevsw to be struct Xdevsw *Xdevsw; (ie. indirect)
: and let drivers register (ie. Xdevsw[PTY_MAJOR] = &pty_bdevsw;). (or, even
: better, have cdevsw_add or bdevsw_add to do the dirty work).
: This would doing LKM's and reduce or eliminate the need for conf.c.
This is the `dynamic devices' part I struck from the proposal when it was
deed too much work for this part of the transition. It's a good thing, some
time down the road, but it's not necessary Right Now.
===== Todd Vierling (Personal firstname.lastname@example.org) =====
== "There's a myth that there is a scarcity of justice to go around, so
== that if we extend justice to 'those people,' it will somehow erode the
== quality of justice everyone else receives." -- Maria Price