Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 23:21:34 +0200 (MET DST) From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers) Cc: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer) Subject: Re: devfs policy question. Message-ID: <199604292121.XAA03614@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199604261858.LAA27576@ref.tfs.com> from Julian Elischer at "Apr 26, 96 11:58:42 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Julian Elischer wrote: > What should devfs do to a device that is open when > the driver requests that it be deleted? Should not happen. :) > At the moment a vgone() is done on the vnode. > is this right? > > It is dissociated from devfs and vgone (well vclean actually) > associates it with the deadfs vnops. > > Is this the right thing to do? Perhaps also log it? > Policy question number two > should devfs allow the creation of fifo/named pipes? > I tend to think yes.... they are dynamic and kinda-like devices Hmm, maybe. :) (I don't have an idea where to use it for, but it certainly can't hurt much to have them.) (No idea about your 3rd question.) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604292121.XAA03614>