Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The device file is created by a translator to help other user programs
to open the device.
For example, we can create a device file /dev/eth0 with the translator.
When the user program calls file_name_lookup() on the file and
device_open() as I do in the code, I actually open the device of eth0.
So device_file here can be /dev/eth0, /dev/eth1, etc.
You are opening that file as if you expect it to be there, and to return
you a port you can do device_open on. That seems very confused to me.
You call device_open on master device files.
The purpose of the translator is to help other programs get the port to
the device, so I suggested if it was OK that file_name_lookup() returns
the port to the device directly.
antrik said it was quite confusing for him because file_name_lookup()
should return a Hurd port, not a Mach port.
Here are his suggestions. You can see them in the message:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2008-08/msg00005.html
Few people gives suggestions, So antrik said I could use any design he
suggested.
So what is your suggestion?
Zheng Da
