From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 29 17:01:32 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 434F116A4CE for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:01:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from multiplay.co.uk (www1.multiplay.co.uk [212.42.16.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851CB43D2D for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:01:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from vader ([212.135.219.179]) by multiplay.co.uk (multiplay.co.uk [212.42.16.7]) (MDaemon.PRO.v7.2.0.R) with ESMTP id md50000592255.msg for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:54:56 +0100 Message-ID: <010a01c4a645$e6356630$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> From: "Steven Hartland" To: "Brenden Grace" , References: <1096476707.2670.1088.camel@localhost.localdomain> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:00:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:54:56 +0100 (not processed: message from valid local sender) X-MDRemoteIP: 212.135.219.179 X-Return-Path: killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:54:59 +0100 Subject: Re: Device probe issue with an em(4) compatible device X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:01:32 -0000 If its compatible with em why not just alter the em to support the additional id's? Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brenden Grace" > I am writing a network driver for a em(4) compatible chip. I know the > specific subvendor id and subdevice id, but the em(4) driver seems to > attach to the device before my driver can. Is this because the em_probe > is occurring before my probe AND because the em_probe is allowing for > PCI_ANY_ID for subvendor subdevice ids (the vendor and device ids of my > card are identical to an actual Intel card)? If so the solution then > would be to have the em driver return a number less than zero in > em_probe and my driver's probe to return a number greater than the > em_probes's return? > > On a side not, would it also not be more correct for FreeBSD drivers in > the tree to return a negative number for _any_ device that accepts a > PCI_ANY_ID value? ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.