Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262411AbUKZXDv (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:03:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263320AbUKZTtI (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:49:08 -0500 Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([204.152.189.113]:4291 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262411AbUKZT3H (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:29:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:58:07 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Nigel Cunningham Cc: kernel list Subject: Re: Suspend 2 merge: 9/51: init/* changes. Message-ID: <20041125215807.GI2488@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1101292194.5805.180.camel@desktop.cunninghams> <1101293918.5805.221.camel@desktop.cunninghams> <20041125170718.GA1417@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <1101418614.27250.21.camel@desktop.cunninghams> <20041125214524.GE2488@elf.ucw.cz> <1101419500.27250.41.camel@desktop.cunninghams> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1101419500.27250.41.camel@desktop.cunninghams> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1532 Lines: 34 Hi! > > > > And if you really want to make it changeable, pass major:minor from userland; once > > > > userland is running getting them is easy. > > > > > > Yes, but that's also far uglier, and who thinks in terms of major and > > > minor numbers anyway? I think of my harddrive as /dev/sda, not 08:xx. > > > The parsing accepts majors and minors, of course, but shouldn't we make > > > these things easier to do, not harder? (Would we insist on using majors > > > and minors for root=?). > > > > Kernel interface is not supposed to be "easy". root= has exception, > > that's init code, and you can't easily ls -al /dev at that point. If > > you want easy interface, create userland program that looks up > > minor/major in /dev/ and uses them. > > That's a fair possibility, but is it really worth it when all we need to > do is make two routines not be init? We would still have to duplicate > some of this code elsewhere anyway, because we need to parse the major > and minor numbers. Parsing major/minor should be as simple as sscanf("%d %d"). And you'll have one less modification to generic code. Yes I think it is worth it. Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl! - 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/