Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 06:48:49 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, julian@whistle.com Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, nick.hibma@jrc.it, phk@critter.freebsd.dk, roger@cs.strath.ac.uk Subject: Re: cdevsw_add Message-ID: <199906042048.GAA25745@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> The isa drivers provide many bad examples. Most of them attached the >> devsw in a disgusting SYSINIT even if the device is disabled. I moved >> the devsw attach to the device attach function in some drivers that >> I worked on. This was necessary to support pcvt and syscons sharing a >> devsw entry. > >Firstly, the SYSINIT code was a stopgap. It will evolve with time.. The Like most stogaps, it was there too long (3.5 years). It is mostly gone now. >... >I therefore put it to the group that the right place to do devsw[] >manipulation is neither in xxx-probe, or xxxx_attach, but in xxx_init(), >which is only called once, and IS called at teh right time. >It should also be noted that teh devsw[] extraction code should be run >from the init() code when it is run with the 'shutdown' argument. (but >only when the driver arees to allow itself to be unlinked). You're forgetting that devsw[] is another stopgap. The kernel should probably use something like devfs, where dev_t's only exist for devices that actually exist. xxx_init() is far too early to decide which hardware devices exist. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906042048.GAA25745>