From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753467Ab0AWO1e (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:27:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752864Ab0AWO1d (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:27:33 -0500 Received: from senator.holtmann.net ([87.106.208.187]:44256 "EHLO mail.holtmann.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751082Ab0AWO1c (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:27:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 31/31] CAPI: Officially claim char major 191 From: Marcel Holtmann To: isdn@linux-pingi.de Cc: Alan Cox , Jan Kiszka , David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, i4ldeveloper@listserv.isdn4linux.de, isdn4linux@listserv.isdn4linux.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox In-Reply-To: <201001231432.09918.isdn@linux-pingi.de> References: <20100123122430.5a078b4a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <1264250892.3469.52.camel@violet> <201001231432.09918.isdn@linux-pingi.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 15:28:28 +0100 Message-ID: <1264256908.3469.58.camel@violet> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Karsten, > > > > I found no trace of this mysterious "pcl181" device, neither in-tree > > > > nor out there in the wild. At the same time, the in-tree CAPI > > > > middleware is using major 191 for many years now and obviously without > > > > any conflict. Let's officially claim this major number. > > > > > > This is not the way it should have been done but whoever needs spanking > > > got away with it years ago. Given that this seems the best way forward. > > > > > > With LANANA hat on > > > > actually in the days of udev, the capifs is not really needed anymore. > > The right choice would be to remove it. I haven't been enabling it since > > years. > > > So far I understand, the pppd capiplugin is the only user of it, so it could > be disabled for most users without any problems, as long they are not using > PPP connections via CAPI. PPP connection via CAPI works just fine without capifs. You just need udev to create the device nodes. > I never understand capifs very well, I think that it can be dropped because of > udev, but maybe need some adjustment in user space as well (make sure that > udev did create the node before open it). I am pretty sure that I send a patch for that a long long time ago. I haven been using CAPI + PPP without capifs. > I f I remember correctly, here was some proposal to replace the /dev/capi/ > nodes with devpts, this would remove the complete capi_tty device major > as well. Don't remember anything like this. However extending the kernel code with a CAPI PPP channel type would be better actually. Regards Marcel