Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?
From: Bruce M Simpson (bms_at_spc.org)
Date: 06/10/04
- Previous message: Peter Wemm: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 03:09:18 +0100 To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:16:30PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> Personally I don't think there is much need for a long discussion
> and I would prefer to see simply a show of hands for yes and no,
> and any hear any really heavy duty arguments pro et contra.
I'd say yes. I find the names device_t and dev_t overly confusing
in the kernel; one refers to NEWBUS, the other to cdev. Going to
an explicit structure pointer I would find less confusing. I also
find the use of the same type name differently in kernel and userland
confusing.
Regards
BMS
_______________________________________________
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: Peter Wemm: "Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "dev_t / udev_t confusion ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
