[openbeosnetteam] Re: Progress report

> David wrote:
> > Philippe, no offense, but I actually want to rip out all sorts of 
> > code and reorganise what we have anyways! Given this your code is 
> > very useful but I can't help thinking that a totally new clean 
> > codebase will be cool and should allow us to have a best possible 
> > implementation.
> I would vote +1 for a code reorganisation too.

Me too, and for a reworked naming scheme (proper prefixes, init/
shutdown calls: right now, we have destroy, delete, shutdown, 
whatever).

> Well, the R5.x devfs don't let you choose where to put the device 
> drivers, as 
> he looks for device drivers in these places only:

A "rescan" finds all drivers, not only those symlinked in .../drivers/
dev.
But you're right. I am not sure though, if there are any restrictions 
on modules.
And we will have only two drivers, the socket driver, and the 
networking card driver.

> We could move all *support* functions into a support module, that all 
> modules (core, interfaces, protocols) will use (get_module()).
> 
> Kernel modules are like kernel DLLs, except... they're not really :-)
> get_module() / put_module() do reference count, so no multiple 
> loads...
> 
> pools, mbuf, misc, timers, queues would be better in one network 
> support 
> module.

I disagree here - mbuf, and pools are quite usable for others, too. I 
would just make different modules for them. We could also consider 
reworking the timer to don't have those net_ prefixes and put it in 
another module.

Adios...
   Axel.

Other related posts: