On Tue, 7 May 2002 email@example.com wrote:
> > /driverfs/root/pci0/00:1f.4/usb_bus/000/
> >and it wouldn't be impossible (or even necessarily very hard) to make an
> >IDE controller export the "IDE device tree" the same way a USB controller
> >now exports the "USB device tree".
> >For things like hotplug etc, I think driverfs is eventually the only way
> >to go, simply because it gives you the full (and unambiguous) path to
> >_any_ device, and is completely bus-agnostic.
> >But there is definitely a potential backwards-compatibility-issue.
> One interesting thing here would be to have some optional link between
> the bus-oriented device tree and the function-oriented tree (ie. devfs
> or simply /dev). For example, an IDE node in driverfs could eventually
> hold symlinks to the entries it provides in /dev when using devfs (or
> just provide major/minor when not using devfs).
> What do you think ?
> One problem I've been faced with on ppc is to be able to match
> a linux device with what the firmware (Open Firmware) thinks that
> device is. The firmware view is bus-centered and it would be pretty
> easy to provide some additional entries in driverfs that give the
> OF fullpath of a given device. But then, the link between the actual
> driver in driverfs and the "device" as used by, for example, the
> filesystem isn't trivial.
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/