On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 10:42 Brad Spencer <b...@anduin.eldar.org> wrote:
> Brian Buhrow <buh...@nfbcal.org> writes: > > > hello Brad. I thought the idea behind modules was that you didn't > need to rebuild a > > kernel to add devices to the ioconf table? And, in fact, under the old > module framework, that > > is, NetBSD-5 and earlier, you could add devices and major numbers to the > table without having > > to rebuild the kernel. If, in fact, I need to rebuild the kernel to add > device drivers to the > > kernel, then I submit our module framework is fatally broken. So, I'll > hope that isn't the > > case and proceed. If I figure out how to do it, I'll post here so > others won't have to climb > > that learning curve using the same path. > > -thanks > > -Brian OT: dh@ and I had a discussion (on-list here and in #netbsd-code iirc) surrounding these sorts of issues some time (~2 years?) ago and I believe he got excited/disappointed enough that he suggested he might write-up some thoughts on modules and NetBSD, incl (if this helps dh@ find the paper, or otherwise chime in) why block vs character distinction is unnecessary, and a mistake. Dave? -bch > > > My general experience seems to be that a recompile of the kernel is > needed, at least when used in the manor I used it (adding a new module > that used a static major number in one of the major files). I was > bundling a module that would be added to src anyway, so the recompile > wasn't a notable problem. The devsw_attach(9) man page implies that the > major and minor number can be selected with that call, but I have never > used it that way. > > > -- > Brad Spencer - b...@anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS - http://anduin.eldar.org >
