Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 19:39:58 +1100 (EST) From: Ada <ada@not-enough.bandwidth.org> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bus/Processor specific I/O methods - was Re: Beginning SPARC port Message-ID: <199712160839.TAA05709@noether.blah.org> In-Reply-To: <199712152018.MAA08626@hub.freebsd.org> from "owner-hackers-digest@freebsd.org" at "Dec 15, 97 12:18:16 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Jonathan Mini <j_mini@efn.org> > Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 23:32:06 -0800 > Subject: Re: Bus/Processor specific I/O methods - was Re: Beginning SPARC port > Although it seems rediculous, I ask a different question : "how long until > FreeBSD has a 256k kernel?" I'd like to see a system come into implementation > where all modules can become dynamic, including things such as the UFS and inet > modules, which currently are basically manditory. (the astute reader would > realise that a dynamic module system that did this would require a built-in > dependancy system, but that's another issue altogether) > This type of dynamic loading of modules can't be implemented correctly until > we have a method of easily tracking resources dynamically. John-Mark's > bus/device system does this, and, based on my observations of he current > codebase, it is obvious (at least to me, YMMV) that this code is greatly > required. There is a fundamental problem between this and devfs: if devfs waits for the driver to create device nodes, and the driver waits until its device entry is touched before it's loaded, how does the process begin? Ada. -- `Albert, stop telling God what to do.' -- Niels Bohr
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712160839.TAA05709>