Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> FWIW, I'd recommend *against* stashing a node in /dev. Better to just
> access the /devices node directly IMO. The /dev links are a convenience
> that is appropriate for "quasi-public" interfaces... you're not going to
> need the /dev link (won't this just live in some fixed location like
> /devices/pseudo or somesuch?) and its one less thing you need to
> publish. (Plus then no need for devfsadm changes to support the
> /dev/heci interface.)
I disagree. Stability is hardly relevant here, because /devices
essentially is not an interface, it is precisely what the man page says:
All content at or below the /devices name space is an imple-
mentation artifact and subject to incompatible change or
removal without notification.
It is true that managing of the /dev namespace could be made easier
(esp. for leaf driver developers). I believe the issue is well
recognized among the I/O framework folks, however the work started by
the devname project is affected by lack of resources.
-Artem
