Hello,

> > Hmm, they basically dump "struct device" as it seems. They are unable to
> > pass any PNP information about the device, which limits usability I think.
> > With this approach, it could end up like:
> > 
> > 	struct dvannounce {
> > 		char 		name[...];
> > 		...
> > 		union {
> > 			struct pci_attach_args 		pci;
> > 			struct pcmcia_attach_args 	pcmcia;
> > 			struct usb_attach_args 		usb;
> > 			...
> > 		};
> > 	};
> > 
> > That seems less extensible and more fragile then textual format. Plus
> > the demon would need to be updated every time you added a new bus...
> 
> Would passing the struct cfdata (with all the arrays and strings like
> *cf_name and *cf_loc) instead of all the attach_args work?

While it would be nice, these actually lack information compared to
attach_args (usb is a nice example where it would probably work, not so
PCI, PCMCIA and most others it seems.)

	Regards,
		-- Jachym Holecek