Re: Adding KAUTH_DEVICE_TTY_ATTACH_<TYPE>

[Iain Hibbert <plunky%rya-online.net@localhost>]

On Wed, 6 May 2009, Elad Efrat wrote:

> I'm not entirely happy with it as we call kauth twice for bcsp, btuart,
> and ppp. Do you see a reason to separate ADD and ENABLE and not just
> treat both as the same? is there a situation where you'd want to a user
> or a program only one of the two?

I think it should just be ADD for those at least.

The other two I'm not sure about but in the future if somebody did the
work to switch strip(4) and slip(4) to auto-cloning devices, the ENABLE
for those could be dropped..

> Maybe for ppp, btuart, and bcsp, we should combine ADD and ENABLE as
> the code only supports doing both together?

Why provide a scope for each pseudo-device type in network (ppp, slip,
strip) but not in bluetooth (bcsp, btuart)?  (I can't summon an objection
to either method or the difference, just questioning the consistency :)

iain