Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-31,: Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

# Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)

Richard Gooch (Richard.Gooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU)
Fri, 7 Aug 1998 10:56:14 +1000

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Rafael Reilova: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Previous message: Edgar Toernig: "[PATCH] 2.0.35 scsi.c single_lun flag"
- In reply to: Shawn Leas: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"

H. Peter Anvin writes:
> Followup to: <Pine.HPP.3.96.980805205308.17170K-100000@ixion.honeywell.c=
> om>
> By author: Shawn Leas <sleas@ixion.honeywell.com>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >=20
> > 2) Ease of system maintainence. SYSV style/looking devices tell you
> > EXACTLY where your disks are at a glance, and that is GOOD. Auto devic=
> e
> > generation is good too...
>
> Auto device generation can be a security hole, and can be done in user
> space without hogging tons of kernel memory.
>
> > 3) It might help performance with some configs.
> > 4) It will NEVER hurt performance, only help it if ANYTHING.
>
> devfs eats lots of kernel memory. That WILL hurt performance.

This is untrue. Devfs is very light on kernel memory. On what do you
base your claim?

Regards,

Richard....

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

- Next message: Rafael Reilova: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"
- Previous message: Edgar Toernig: "[PATCH] 2.0.35 scsi.c single_lun flag"
- In reply to: Shawn Leas: "Re: DEVFSv50 and /dev/fb? (or /dev/fb/? ???)"