From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 9 17:03:25 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BB3716A4CE for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:03:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E296543D1D for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:03:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.0.12] (g4.samsco.home [192.168.0.12]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i59H5hH1003017; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 11:05:44 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <40C742A0.5090704@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:02:24 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Poul-Henning Kamp References: <55790.1086796559@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <55790.1086796559@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on pooker.samsco.org cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dev_t / udev_t confusion ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:03:25 -0000 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: > > 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 ? Sounds fine to me. No prefix at all would work too. > > 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). > Is this going to have any consequences on COMPAT_LINUX code or anything else that calls ioctl() through obscure means? Scott