Re: sys/ tree re-structuring proposal

[Munish Chopra <mchopra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2003-08-04 00:20 -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> 
> [...] 
> :
> :This was discussed for FreeBSD too, though I'm not sure if it ever hit
> :the lists. Some of the problems that popped up were USB NICs (for
> :instance). Do they belong under net or dev/usb?
> :
> :There were quite a few examples like that, and perhaps other pitfalls -
> :I wasn't able to stick around until the discussion had settled.
> :
> :-- 
> :Munish Chopra
> 
>     net is a special case because there are so blasted many NIC drivers.
>     I would have a tendancy to create a bus hierarchy under net/ as well as
>     under dev/, so:
> 
>     net {
> 	pci
> 	isa
> 	usb
> 	firewire
> 	etc...
>     }
>     dev {	/* non-NIC device drivers */
> 	pci
> 	isa
> 	usb
> 	firewire
> 	etc...
>     }
>

Off the bat, this seems to make sense.
 
>     Another reason for keeping net/ separated out is that a lot of the NIC
>     drivers could potentially share a mini-library's worth of code, like
>     the miibus stuff for example, which could go in net/common or something
>     like that.
> 

Another good reason. It's tough to come up with a solution that is both
elegant and functional, but it's not impossible.

-- 
Munish Chopra