From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jan 15 10: 8:20 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B1AE37B401; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:08:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D160743F5F; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:08:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0FI8Iro008785 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:08:18 -0500 (EST) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.11.6/8.9.1) id h0FI8DO75972; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:08:13 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15909.41869.176059.969484@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:08:13 -0500 (EST) To: phk@freebsd.org Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: DEVFS and GEOM mandatorification timeline. In-Reply-To: <17320.1042650537@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <15909.37306.656490.486061@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <17320.1042650537@critter.freebsd.dk> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG phk@freebsd.org writes: > In message <15909.37306.656490.486061@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>, Andrew Gallatin > writes: > > > > > >Speaking of /dev, driver writers, and API/ABI decisions to be made > >before the 5.0-stable brach, I've got a minor axe to grind. Factory > >devices. > > > >Weren't you talking about changing the driver interface in such a way > >as to make factory devices easier to implement on FreeBSD? I would > >*love* to see this in 5.0-stable so that I don't have to support the > >clunky old way I came up with to handle it (conjuring a vnode out of > >thin air..) Or am I all wet, and its easy to do now? > > There are a number of ways to do this, none easy (IMO). > > I understand what you want, but I don't think we can credibly claim > to get this into any working shape for 5-stable. I obviously don't know this code as well as you do, but I'd think that adding a 'struct file *fp' pointer to the list of args that the various vops take would be all thats needed. What am I missing? Thanks, Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message