Re: dev.* analogue for interfaces
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:[color=blue]
> John-Mark Gurney <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:[color=green]
>> My case is perfectly clear. We already have dev.* for this, and you
>> want to add a second, confusing, place to put similar/same information...
>> Yes, this is specific for network interfaces, but what makes a network
>> interface special that it's configuration can't live in dev.*? You
>> stated that you were fine w/ some items being in dev.* and others in
>> net.if.* for the same device, which is why I objected.[/color]
> If you can't tell the difference between a struct ifnet and a device_t,
> I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree.
I think you need to experiment with this before you push a proposal. In
net80211 I've had parallel net.wlan.X tree's that are companion to dev.*
tree's and it's worked out ok but mostly because there is a clear
layering/distinction between the two. I believe the original motivation
for this was for s/w only devices that don't otherwise have a dev.*
entry. I recently handled something like this for the cryptosoft driver
by arbitrarily attaching it to nexus and it worked out very well. I
personally would just attach these other devices under net. as that's
existing practice but I'm open to your suggestion.
[email]email@example.com[/email] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "firstname.lastname@example.org"