Re: Project UDI (Device Drivers)

[Hiten Pandya <hmp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> 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.

	I can't really comment on Newbus, but I am sure we ought to keep
	something like busdma around, until a better API comes about.
	Not only because it's a nice interface, but it is used in NetBSD
	and FreeBSD and OpenBSD, so I guess we should stick with it.

	The KLD framework surely needs an overhaul though.  I am
	thinking about integrating changes from FreeBSD-CURRENT for
	the KLD framework, when I have some free time in my hands.

	Regards,

--
Hiten Pandya
hmp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx