From owner-freebsd-current Sat Aug 21 14:48:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles514.castles.com [208.214.165.78]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE02F14F2A for ; Sat, 21 Aug 1999 14:48:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA01386; Sat, 21 Aug 1999 14:39:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199908212139.OAA01386@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Warner Losh Cc: Mike Smith , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP: at_shutdown going away In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 21 Aug 1999 01:01:35 MDT." <199908210701.BAA41654@harmony.village.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 14:39:17 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > In message <199908190737.AAA04137@dingo.cdrom.com> Mike Smith writes: > : Seriously though, I'm in the process of replacing a number of the > : ad-hoc event handler callout lists in the kernel (most notably the > : at_shutdown and apm* lists) with a generic implementation. > > Shouldn't the apm stuff use the new-bus hooks? I've migraded a couple > of uses in pccard to using that now that I have newbus node to hang > them off of... Certainly anything that's attached to a bus should be using the bus' suspend event handler, yes. -- \\ The mind's the standard \\ Mike Smith \\ of the man. \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ -- Joseph Merrick \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message