From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 9 16:23:17 2004 Return-Path: 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 212AF16A4CE for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:23:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail5.speakeasy.net (mail5.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.205]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00E043D5D for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:23:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 24378 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2004 16:23:16 -0000 Received: from dsl027-160-063.atl1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) encrypted SMTP for ; 9 Jun 2004 16:23:16 -0000 Received: from 10.50.41.233 (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i59GND5h018994; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 12:23:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 12:24:04 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: <55790.1086796559@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <55790.1086796559@critter.freebsd.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200406091224.04653.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on server.baldwin.cx cc: arch@FreeBSD.org cc: Poul-Henning Kamp 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:23:17 -0000 On Wednesday 09 June 2004 11:55 am, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <53993.1086779790@critter.freebsd.dk>, Poul-Henning Kamp writes: > >The change proposed is more or less to do: > > s/dev_t/struct cdev */ > > s/udev_t/dev_t/ > >over all the kernel sources (366 files or so). > > Looks like a "yea" so far, so I have a couple of follow-up questions: > > struct cdev currently has members named si_* because it > used to be called "specinfo", do we want to change that > inconsistency at the same time ? (either by reverting to > the specinfo name or by changing to a cd_ prefix ? Sure, maybe dev_foo prefix? cd_ is fine though, just pick one and be consistent. > cdevsw->ioctl() takes a caddr_t pointer argument which > really should be a void *, do we want to change that > as well (since it is all the same files we'll have to > change). Ok with me. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org