Re: Project UDI (Device Drivers)

[Pedro Giffuni <giffunip@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi Matt;

I'm not particularly biased in favor of UDI. As a matter of fact I think the UDI
people always thought of it a secondary driver framework. I understand it should
basicly works on FreeBSD 4.x though, so I just wanted the idea floating around,
if it becomes important later on, great, if it definitely dies.. so be it..

I am wondering though.. will DragonFlyBSD keep newbus, perhaps as a userland API?
FreeBSD is making changes there (inheritance in kobj() ). What about busdma? I
guess you wouldn't want to break new drivers coming from FreeBSD.

cheers,

    Pedro.

Matthew Dillon wrote:

>     IMHO I think we have to implement our own messaging framework first,
>     because I think it would be too much of an interruption to try to
>     integrate something like UDI from the get-go.  But it sounds like once
>     we do have our own framework that it *would* be possible, even practical,
>     for those interested in UDI to port it as a user-level interface
>     to begin with (since it appears to have abstractions sufficient to deal
>     with a user-level interface), and once that is working it could be moved
>     into the kernel.  Development is a lot easier to do in userland.
>
>     I do not personally believe I would have time to work on UDI myself, I
>     have too many other bullet items to cover.
>
>                                                         -Matt