Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> wrote:
>But I see no advantage to dynamic devsw additions if you don't also
>propagate this where user applications, opening well known device names
>in /dev, get the device they expect. It seems that it deals with part
>of the problem, but not the really important part.

Of course, I understand my proposal is not atractive for userland.
So I never mention userland (excluded config(8)).

The dynamic devnode configuration framework like devfs is useful.
Yes, it can be implemented without the dynamic devsw framework.

But the dynamic configuration of kernel needs the dynamic devsw.
The dynamic configuration of kernel needs 'configurable' kernel.

My proposal is not for the userland but for the kernel.

To miss the word 'for/in kernel' is my mistake...

--- MAEKAWA Masahide