| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The status of dynamic devices in 2.6The status of dynamic devices in 2.6Posted Dec 11, 2003 4:48 UTC (Thu) by cameronrich (guest, #12643)Parent article: The status of dynamic devices in 2.6 Many embedded systems use it too. Using mknod is just not a practical option in some cases. Consider the MTD flash driver which is tightly integrated with flash addresses and partitions (each partition is a "file" and 1 or more sectors make up a partition). To make flash sectors available to an application, the kernel must be tweaked - and devfs allows them to become available when the system is rebooted. This driver relies heavily on devfs. As an embedded developer, we wouldn't consider 2.6 until this feature was fully operational or at least replaced with something similar...
(Log in to post comments)
The status of dynamic devices in 2.6 Posted Dec 11, 2003 8:50 UTC (Thu) by gregkh (subscriber, #8) [Link] For block devices udev works just fine today.So yes, your embedded system can look at using 2.6 with udev if you must require the functionality of not knowing exactly what devices your system has. But since you specified the reconfiguration, why use devfs or udev at all? Why not a static /dev which would save you lots of time and testing.
The status of dynamic devices in 2.6 Posted Dec 11, 2003 8:54 UTC (Thu) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] If the filesystem doesn't support devices you can use a tmpfs /dev,though it would eat some RAM.
|
|
||||||||||||