Re: (Semi-random) thoughts on device tree structure and devfs

[der Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> I think the "pseudo-device" abstraction is unnecessary

> I think it makes sense, because it allows to limit use of the
> interface-attribute-less "root" to a minimum.  There is a reason that
> many/most ports use just one "mainbus" at root.

That doesn't make the pseudo-device abstraction necessary.  I've
sometimes wondered why pseudo-devices weren't handled by creating a
pseudo-bus for them to attach at; I did that once, and it was no more
than an afternoon's work to have pseudo0 attach at mainbus0 and then my
device attach at pseudo0.  (I did this because I needed a struct
device, but there's no reason it couldn't have been done instead of
creating pseudo-devices as we know them today.)

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B