On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 05:53:38PM -0800, Bill Studenmund wrote:

 > I think we should put them all in the tree. It'll let us keep track of
 > what is and isn't in the system.

That would require a MAJOR overhaul of all of the pseudo-device drivers,
and may not, in fact, be the exact semantics that we want.

 > > 	2. The parent of pseudo-devices that are in the device tree is
 > > 	   ROOT.  It would be fine with me to change it to PSEUDO (and
 > > 	   define such a value, obviously), but then you'd need to make
 > > 	   sure that all the places that test for ROOT also test for
 > > 	   PSEUDO.
 > 
 > Why not make a PSEUDO node under ROOT, and put all pseudo devices under
 > that? That way it's obvious that it's a pseudo device.

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>