Subject: Re: 32 bit dev_t
To: Chris G. Demetriou <>
From: Todd Vierling <tv@NetBSD.ORG>
List: tech-kern
Date: 01/15/1998 13:58:54
On Thu, 15 Jan 1998, Chris G. Demetriou wrote:

: [ I've been busy with other things the last few days. ]

And in that time you missed an important point on this track.  :)

: > `Yeah, right.'  Past experience shows that any time you expect users
: > to do two things at once, some of them are going to forget, not read
: > the directions at all, or just plain screw it up.  Why have the
: > support hassle when you don't need it?
: I, for one, would rather take the support hassle once or twice --
: i.e. when the switch is made in -current and when the next release is
: done (and the latter shouldn't be a hassle, if the upgrade process is
: any good) -- than be saddled with a bad-looking device number format
: for years to come.

The thing is, this matter is fine now.  Taking a suggestion from you (table
of major numbers/minor-number-translating functions) and Charles's
suggestions wrt specinfo, it's now possible to have both 16 and 32 bit
dev_t's coexisting.  Translation is only done when the kernel caches the
dev_t deep in a vnode (used when calling device functions), and the devices
see 32 bit dev_t's whereas userland sees untouched dev_t's.  Voila!

===== Todd Vierling (Personal =====
== "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