Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:58:17 +0100 (CET) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: Fwd: struct inode size reduction. |
| |
Hi,
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> > My main question here is whether that code hurts in any way? Does it > > prevent other cleanups? Sure this code needs more work to be really > > useful, but as long as it only wastes a bit of space, I'd prefer to keep > > it. > > Yes, dead code always hurts.
It's not really dead code, it's not yet used code and if it stays there as a reminder to actually do something about it, it's good that it hurts.
> > - error = register_chrdev(driver->major, driver->name, &tty_fops); > + error = register_chrdev_region(driver->major, driver->minor_start, > + driver->num, driver->name, &tty_fops);
Are that much parameters really needed? When I look through the character device list, I basically see two usages. 1. A character device is mapped to n device numbers (where n is <= 8). In this case it should be enough to register a really available character device with a single device number. More can be configured e.g. through a sysfs interface. Currently we have here misc devices users, which is running out of number space and the other users which are often wasting a complete major number for a few devices. 2. A large number of dynamic virtual devices (e.g. terminals), these want a complete major anyway and currently they have to register multiple of them. These are the two cases a new character device core should be able to handle. On top of this we can still think about a small compatibility layer.
bye, Roman
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |