Re: LANANA: To Pending Device Number Registrants
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
Tue, 15 May 2001 15:11:07 -0700
Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>
> According to H. Peter Anvin:
> > A device can inherently belong to multiple device classes, and it
> > really should be thought of as such.
>
> And then there are layering technologies like LVM and loopback.
> They should be included in a discovery, but if you limit yourself
> to one "device type", there's no place for them.
>
> > For example a disk may belong, at the same time, to the "scsi",
> > "disk" and "scsi-disk" device classes [...]
>
> True, but in a sane system, "scsi" + "disk" implies "scsi-disk".
>
Well, of course, but it's still a separate class. An operation can
belong to "scsi-disk" that doesn't belong in either "scsi" or "disk".
You can replace the - with an upside-down U if you want; it's not in
Latin-1 unfortunately.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/