| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20070907210029.GB4357@khazad-dum.debian.net> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 18:00:29 -0300 From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br> To: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> Cc: khali@...ux-fr.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...e.de Subject: Re: Platform device id On Fri, 07 Sep 2007, David Brownell wrote: > For that matter, a *driver* should never create its own device node(s) > in the first place. Device creation belongs elsewhere, like as part of > platform setup or, for busses with integral enumeration support like > PCI or USB, bus glue. Linux is moving away from that legacy model. This assumes that we have a better bus than "platform" to dump drivers like thinkpad-acpi, hdaps, and a host of other host-specific stuff. > I realize that may be more easily said than done in some cases, > like i8042 on non-PNP systems. Yes, and there is a LOT of non-PNP stuff involved, since platform became the dumping ground for host-specific devices (as opposed to platform-specific devices). -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists