Re: USB device allocation
Brian Swetland (swetland@be.com)
Tue, 5 Oct 1999 15:12:26 -0700
["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@transmeta.com>]
> David Weinehall wrote:
> >
> > Oh, and have you actually ever tried a system running devfs (such as a
> > kernel patched with Richard Gooch' patch, or a Solaris-system), or?
> >
> > Hmmm. If USB isn't enough to convince, think about USB2 (128 devices/bus
> > if I'm not all wrong), FireWire, FibreChannel, SCSI-III, etc. Sooner or
> > later we need a solution to the problem with devices. And devfs is a very
> > good, thought-through, proven to work (been used in Solaris for many
> > years) and backward-compatible solution. And it's available now.
>
> Solaris does *not* use devfs; the /devices tree is an on-disk device
> node tree which is constructed at initialization time, and it is
> persistent. A much better solution, IMNSHO.
How exactly does such a solution work with hot-plugable devices?
Some daemon that gets informed of devices appearing and disappearing?
I don't think I'm being unreasonable in thinking that when a device
is added to the system it should instantly be usable. That's kind of
the point of dynamic busses, no?
Brian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/