From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun 10 02:09:23 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 B187416A4CE
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:09:23 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from arginine.spc.org (arginine.spc.org [195.206.69.236])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E40243D39
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:09:23 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from bms@spc.org)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9532365219; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:09:22 +0100 (BST)
Received: from arginine.spc.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (arginine.spc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with LMTP id 04668-02; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:09:22 +0100 (BST)
Received: from empiric.dek.spc.org (82-147-17-88.dsl.uk.rapidplay.com
	[82.147.17.88])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E20A365213; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:09:21 +0100 (BST)
Received: by empiric.dek.spc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id B7D50610F; Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:09:19 +0100 (BST)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:09:18 +0100
From: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Message-ID: <20040610020918.GF4623@empiric.dek.spc.org>
References: <53993.1086779790@critter.freebsd.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53993.1086779790@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:09:23 -0000

On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:16:30PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> Personally I don't think there is much need for a long discussion
> and I would prefer to see simply a show of hands for yes and no,
> and any hear any really heavy duty arguments pro et contra. 

I'd say yes. I find the names device_t and dev_t overly confusing
in the kernel; one refers to NEWBUS, the other to cdev. Going to
an explicit structure pointer I would find less confusing. I also
find the use of the same type name differently in kernel and userland
confusing.

Regards
BMS