Re: device-major question

[SODA Noriyuki <soda%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

>>>>> On Thu, 12 May 2016 18:24:00 -0700,
      Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost> said:

>> 1) The conf/majors files contains the following comment:
>> # Majors 160-255 are used for the MI drivers.
>> This "255" has to be changed, because the majors.storage file is
>> already using 332.
>> 
>> What is the new limit for MI drivers?  1023?

> 511 for now.

OK

>> 2) I think the majors.{ws,usb,std,tty,storage} files are only used
>> for the device drivers which were made before the sys/conf/majors
>> file was introduced.  And new MI devices should go to sys/conf/majors
>> instead of majors.{ws,usb,std,tty,storage} even if the device
>> is a ws/usb/std/tty/storage device.
>> 
>> Is this right?

> Not quite.  They are new ports which don't have an existing majors
> so they can use a common MI scheme, Existing ports should still use
> what they have.  New ports can just use the new definitions leaving
> the port majors mostly empty.

I see.

for the record, I've privately asked matt about changing the comments below,
and his answer was that "old MI" was not quite correct, and
"previously not MI" was better.

>> If so, How about changing the following comments in sys/conf/majors
>> # 210-219 reserved for MI ws devices
>> # 220-239 reserved for MI usb devices
>> # 240-259 reserved for MI "std" devices
>> # 260-269 reserved for MI tty devices
>> # 310-339 reserved for MI storage devices
>> to
>> # 210-219 reserved for old MI ws devices
>> # 220-239 reserved for old MI usb devices
>> # 240-259 reserved for old MI "std" devices
>> # 260-269 reserved for old MI tty devices
>> # 310-339 reserved for old MI storage devices
>> # NOTE: new MI devices should go to this file instead of above

The above changes are now commited.

I've fixed hdmicec conflict too.
-- 
soda