Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?
From: Maxime Henrion (mux_at_freebsd.org)
Date: 06/09/04
- Previous message: John Baldwin: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- In reply to: Brian Feldman: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- Next in thread: Garance A Drosihn: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:27:56 +0200 To: Brian Feldman <green@freebsd.org>
Brian Feldman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:16:30PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > [...]
> > 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).
> > [....]
>
> One yes vote, please. The dev_t structure is not treated as opaque,
> so as long as people are going to->dereference it, it deserves to be
> a struct *.
This reflects what I think perfectly.
Cheers,
Maxime
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: John Baldwin: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- In reply to: Brian Feldman: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- Next in thread: Garance A Drosihn: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
