Re: devfs vs udev/hotplug

[Dave Leimbach <leimySPAM2k@xxxxxxx>]

Diego Calleja García <diegocg@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> El Thu, 22 Apr 2004 17:15:42 -0700 (PDT) Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> 
> >     This is a case of using an elephant to solve a problem that could just
> >     as easily be solved by a mouse.
> 
> 
> You're right indeed, that fs idea looks like "reinventing devfs". I guess that
> the right thing to do here would be to make udev to create the device nodes of
> *all* the devices even if their device drivers haven't been loaded (with the
> help of some "hardware detector") and let the kernel load the modules when
> they're needed. In fact it seems like the right thing to do - /dev should show
> *all* the device nodes for my hardware, users shouldn't care if their device
> drivers have been loaded or not.

I'd prefer that all the hardware I can see is active and usable... so unless
you are referring to "on-demand" driver loading I think I can't fully agree
with you :)

Hardware the kernel knows about is one thing... hardware it can drive can 
be different.


Dave