On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 06:56:20PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > It's not a precondition for a file descriptor, either. There are plenty > of ioctl-only device drivers in existence. > > Furthermore, a file descriptor doesn't imply a device entry. Consider > pipe(2), for example. > > As far as the kernel is concerned, a file handle is a nice, uniform > system for providing communication between the kernel and user space. > It doesn't matter if one can read() or write() on it; it's perfectly > normal to support only a subset of the normal operations.
The problem is that sometimes you cannot have a filedescriptor at all. Think about a PPS source connected with a CPU's GPIO pin. You have no filedes to use and defining one just for a PPS source or for a class of PPS sources, I think, is a non sense. RFC simply doesn't consider the fact that you can have a PPS source __without__ a filedes connected with, and a single filedes is considered __always__ connected with a single PPS source. Ciao, Rodolfo -- GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Device Driver [EMAIL PROTECTED] Embedded Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX programming phone: +39 349 2432127 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/