From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Sep 18 12:18:38 1995
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA27120
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 12:18:38 -0700
Received: from GndRsh.aac.dev.com (GndRsh.aac.dev.com [198.145.92.241])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA27115
          for <freebsd-current@freefall.freebsd.org>; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 12:18:33 -0700
Received: (from rgrimes@localhost) by GndRsh.aac.dev.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA04397; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 12:16:43 -0700
From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com>
Message-Id: <199509181916.MAA04397@GndRsh.aac.dev.com>
Subject: Re: pci bus and current??
To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 12:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, hsu@cs.hut.fi, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de,
        freebsd-current@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199509181226.FAA03560@corbin.Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Sep 18, 95 05:25:43 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1363      
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> >>(How to make buffers larger to catch more of the messages in dmesg?)
> >
> >>Sep 17 02:30:12 router /kernel: 32(ffffff80)
> >>Sep 17 02:30:12 router /kernel:         map(24): mem32(ffffff80)
> >>Sep 17 02:30:13 router /kernel: pci0:14: vendor=0xff80, device=0xffff [no driver
> >> assigned]
> >>...
> >
> >You would need an 8MB buffer :-).
> >
> >>Sep 17 02:30:23 router /kernel: bpf: ds0 attached
> >>Sep 17 02:30:23 router /kernel: bpf: lo0 attached
> >>Sep 17 02:30:23 router /kernel: bpf: ppp0 attached
> >>...
> >>Sep 17 02:30:29 router /kernel: bpf: ppp31 attached
> >>Sep 17 02:30:29 router /kernel: bpf: sl0 attached
> >>...
> >>Sep 17 02:30:30 router /kernel: bpf: sl15 attached
> >>Sep 17 02:30:30 router /kernel: bpf: tun0 attached
> >>...
> >>Sep 17 02:30:33 router /kernel: bpf: tun31 attached
> >
> >There are too man bpf messages and not enough messages for the individual
> >pseudo-devices.
> 
>    I think we should kill the "bpf: xxn attached" messages completely. I know
> I'm not alone in this thinking...

Or perhaps reduce the noise level and simply output it during the
if_attach as a ``bpf capable'':

de0: DC21140 [10-100Mb/s] pass 1.1 Ethernet address 00:00:c0:c5:f5:9d bpf


-- 
Rod Grimes                                      rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com
Accurate Automation Company                 Reliable computers for FreeBSD