Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 7 Feb 2003 19:21:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 7 Feb 2003 19:21:51 -0500 Received: from hera.cwi.nl ([192.16.191.8]:28884 "EHLO hera.cwi.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 7 Feb 2003 19:21:50 -0500 From: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 01:31:22 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: To: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, zippel@linux-m68k.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] kill i_cdev and struct char_device Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1065 Lines: 29 From: Roman Zippel On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > [the whole purpose of struct block_device is to provide the link > between a device number and a struct block_device_operations. > struct char_device has no such function, indeed, no function at all] Why do you think, the same shouldn't be done for char_device? You are removing the wrong infrastructure, check how block_dev.c changed between 2.4 and 2.5 and the same still needs to be done for char_dev.c. Maybe. Maybe not. I don't think such things will happen before 2.6. It is very easy to add this code again for 2.7 if desired. Today it is just a lot of dead code. Andries (And for me the question is still open whether we really want something like struct char_device for 2.7.) - 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/