Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Future of Framebuffer

[James S. <jsi...@tr...>]

> Why deal with devfs tinkering? 

I'm thinking devfs was designed with the one file decriptor to hardware
model. As you know I plan to expand this.

> It would make more sense to implement it as its
> own native virtual fs. As an example.. could have something like /dev/gfx as a
> top level mountpoint for the fs, and then just mount on that (wouldn't matter
> if it were devfs or not).

True. Perhaps we should start off this way with a few device filesystems
and see the commonality in them to figure out a common backbone. I just
don't want to end up duplicating alot of what devfs has done.

[snip..
> /dev/fb{,/}0 would simply be a symlink to /dev/gfx/0/fb.

Yeap. 

[snip]... 

Wow!! I see you have put serious thought into this. More than I have. 

> laying out the API would really be the biggest trick.

Oh yeah. Tonight we can discuss some issues then.