Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 11:14:46 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: attilio@FreeBSD.org Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: NEWBUS states Message-ID: <20090905.111446.500055027.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10909050812l4340f679h6a4d7dae1daa3bf8@mail.gmail.com> References: <3bbf2fe10909041546y2b5633e1ue063955568df1a06@mail.gmail.com> <20090904.172310.-1939841993.imp@bsdimp.com> <3bbf2fe10909050812l4340f679h6a4d7dae1daa3bf8@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Attilio,
[[ trimmed ]]
Sounds like we're getting closer to closure...
In message: <3bbf2fe10909050812l4340f679h6a4d7dae1daa3bf8@mail.gmail.com>
Attilio Rao <attilio@FreeBSD.org> writes:
: Bah, sorry, I kept reading it as DS_ rather than DIS_ .
: Anyways, what do you think about, for 9.0, just having one interface
: and remove the DIS_* bloat?
[ disconnect between libdevinfo and kernel types ]
I think we should have both for either 8.x or 9.x (depending on what
the RE@ will permit), and then drop the DIS_ the next release after
that.
: Ok, if you are strongly against it, we can remove them, I just think
: they will be harmless and a good reminder.
[ Have the code there to document/enforce protocol wrt state ]
I think I'd prefer not to have it, but could easily allow it if we
know that it causes no harm and can be reasonably sure that it is
close to what the final protocol will be.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090905.111446.500055027.imp>