From owner-freebsd-lite2  Mon Sep 23 13:41:25 1996
Return-Path: owner-lite2
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA10902
          for lite2-outgoing; Mon, 23 Sep 1996 13:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA10806;
          Mon, 23 Sep 1996 13:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.7.6/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id UAA16983; Mon, 23 Sep 1996 20:40:19 GMT
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 05:40:19 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
cc: dfr@render.com, fs@FreeBSD.ORG, lite2@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: New d_type field in *devsw
In-Reply-To: <199609231520.BAA23463@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960924053628.16671E-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-lite2@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Bruce Evans wrote:

> >What use is [bc]devsw->d_type in Lite2?  It is not used anywhere and
> >having it means changing *every* driver in the system since the
> >initialiser for [bc]devsw is different.  I would quite like to keep
> >[bc]devsw the same as before the lite2 merge to keep compatability with
> >existing drivers.  What do others think?
> 
> Yes, don't change it.  It probably needs to be done in another way for
> devfs.

But what is it?  Is it 'c' or 'b', redundant with the two device switches,
and needed for abstractions that don't want to discriminate using the
name?

Regards,


Mike Hancock