User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

OS abstraction - not always a trap

OS abstraction - not always a trap

Posted Aug 19, 2011 2:28 UTC (Fri) by Eliot (guest, #19701)
In reply to: OS abstraction - not always a trap by djbw
Parent article: Avoiding the OS abstraction trap

>Interesting... I briefly looked at COG ( >when I was still in the "maintain the abstraction" stance. But it was >ultimately untenable. I can not speak to sound drivers, but for isci it >needs to inter-operate with libata, libsas/sas transport class, and the >rest of the scsi midlayer. Duplicating all those common definitions was a >big problem. Redoing work that an upper layer had already handled was >another item. General non-idiomatic expressions and code organization got >in the way...

For the driver I refer to, the majority of it is 'below' alsa midlayer, and handles the detailed interface to the hardware. There is one alsa-specific file that uses APIs provided by our shared code.
Sometimes this does get in the way, and the driver may slowly change to cut out the middle-man, but meanwhile, it is still usable.

And yes, I'm familiar with COG. We use it a bit, but not for this purpose.

(Log in to post comments)

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds