Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: UIO device name | From | Ben Nizette <> | Date | Thu, 25 Sep 2008 20:48:49 +1000 |
| |
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 12:05 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 08:57 +1000, Ben Nizette wrote: > > > > My software just walks /sys/class/uio/uioX/name, finds the one which > > matches then opens the corresponding device. No scripts needed, no > > in-kernel hackery or policy making, just the interface used as the maker > > intended. What's your problem with this approach? > > My problem is this, uio is a generic container for any user space device > and by itself it doesn't mean much. You put some protocol driver on top > of uio, such as uio_smx, to make it mean something. > > Comparing uio with hdX is wrong as hdX means something, it is a block > device for a disk. > A better comparison would be if all kernel devices were named kio%d and > you had to scan /sys to find the name hdX.
UIO drivers certainly aren't first class citizens like kernel mode drivers. They just aren't.
> > Look at the spi subsystem, the protocol drivers name them self.
UIO is an interface type, not a bus type. UIO isn't a subsystem as such, it's a user interface. If the interface is consistent (even if the backing device is different) I don't see the problem with consistent naming.
Anyway, I don't really see the point arguing here - the interface is what it is, it does everything it needs to to allow you to identify the device nodes. The kernel boys have spent a lot of effort over time letting userspace identify and name device nodes and I don't really see the difference here :-)
--Ben.
| |