From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 24 16:28:03 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org 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 94D4E16A41F; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:28:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (vc4-2-0-87.dsl.netrack.net [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3254143D49; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:28:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j9OGQKEu069536; Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:26:20 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:27:47 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20051024.102747.89800306.imp@bsdimp.com> To: jhb@freebsd.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <200510241120.31203.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200510221516.j9MFGnqT026691@pinky.frank-behrens.de> <20051022.103242.98606517.imp@bsdimp.com> <200510241120.31203.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0 (harmony.bsdimp.com [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:26:20 -0600 (MDT) Cc: frank@pinky.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How disable attachment of sio(4) driver to device? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:28:03 -0000 In message: <200510241120.31203.jhb@freebsd.org> John Baldwin writes: : Only if you make sure that sio(4) doesn't try to pass data between probe() and : attach() via the softc since the softc is preserved from probe to attach if : you return 0 from probe. sio's probe routine, now that you mention this, I believe leaves things in a state that sioattach knows abou. However, it looks like the probe routine will get called twice when you return < 0, so maybe this is OK. Warner