Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:37:00 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ? Message-ID: <200406091637.00032.peter@wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <55790.1086796559@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <55790.1086796559@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 08:55 am, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <53993.1086779790@critter.freebsd.dk>, Poul-Henning Kamp writes: > >The change proposed is more or less to do: > > s/dev_t/struct cdev */ > > s/udev_t/dev_t/ > >over all the kernel sources (366 files or so). > > Looks like a "yea" so far, so I have a couple of follow-up questions: I had a slight preference for 'kdev_t *' in the kernel, but 'struct cdev *' works for me as well so I've changed my mind. No objection from me then. > struct cdev currently has members named si_* because it > used to be called "specinfo", do we want to change that > inconsistency at the same time ? (either by reverting to > the specinfo name or by changing to a cd_ prefix ? Whatever works. > cdevsw->ioctl() takes a caddr_t pointer argument which > really should be a void *, do we want to change that > as well (since it is all the same files we'll have to > change). Yes from me. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200406091637.00032.peter>