[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: (Semi-random) thoughts on device tree structure and devfs
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> > We can discard the pseudo-devices concept, if need be.
> In what sense?
> As I explained in the first post, pseudo device is strict definition;
> it has no parent in terms of physiical topology. It may have parents
> in terms of components. I've very carefully investigated those. I
> strictly defferenciate them. Please re-read the first post in this
If a device has no parent, just attach it at root (similar to mainbus*),
with parent == NULL, or even pseudo* at root, and pseudo-dev* at pseudo?
It is a frustration when building a 'software' device that there are some
differences between the methodology of configuration, and it is not
possible to pass configuration arguments from userland into the device
I think the "pseudo-device" abstraction is unnecessary
Main Index |
Thread Index |