From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Apr 24 13:07:02 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4106B106566B
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:07:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB1C8FC2B
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:07:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from zion.baldwin.cx (unknown [208.65.91.234])
	by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C78CA1A4D8B;
	Thu, 24 Apr 2008 06:07:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:11:26 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
References: <480E4269.2090604@icyb.net.ua> <480FBAB9.1000904@icyb.net.ua>
	<48103F36.6060707@icyb.net.ua>
In-Reply-To: <48103F36.6060707@icyb.net.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200804240811.26183.jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: devctl (alike?) for devfs
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:07:02 -0000

On Thursday 24 April 2008 04:05:10 am Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 24/04/2008 01:39 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> > on 23/04/2008 22:49 John Baldwin said the following:
> >> Events have a subsystem associated with them, so devfs events would use
> >> their own subsystem type to avoid that sort of confusion.
> >
> > Thank you for straightening me - for some reason I was thinking about
> > "+"/"-" (attach/detach) events, but I see that "!" (notification) would
> > be much more appropriate. As you said, this can be completely modeled
> > after IF notifications.
>
> Do you think it would be better to post notification from make_dev*() in
> kern_conf.c or from devfs_create()?
> I mean will such notification be useful if there is no devfs to access
> the device from userland?

I'm not sure.  Probably just make_dev*() as all systems will have a devfs 
on /dev.

-- 
John Baldwin