From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 9 17:43:39 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F043D1065679; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 17:43:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vx0-f182.google.com (mail-vx0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9378D8FC16; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 17:43:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vcbfk1 with SMTP id fk1so4498342vcb.13 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:43:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/c81fBBuPovLSll81vQVN2Pwd9lwj1kfdTaFcc1VrUQ=; b=irF3Z8qhkKLOLHbKn47MHu3KgZUgVniZSkJnJpVYaVhd/GHaG05O+sjPoXkKxVE2dQ LXAyBLV2EFmHo6dRBrFe6V03K/9+8tUgjBPnyvb8xg1IKqIYvijEVSVaIrYMzMu5ITig RFajSrwtA2cng9Iww7Kfc8dkS5H352LiKg04g= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.35.10 with SMTP id d10mr7898790vdj.132.1326131019003; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:43:39 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.36.5 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:43:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201201090757.29250.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201201090757.29250.jhb@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:43:38 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: m19gF6cSk9xuLPASd8x3t92Qm_0 Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: John Baldwin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Stefan Bethke , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Where should I put ar71xx_* modules? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:43:40 -0000 On 9 January 2012 04:57, John Baldwin wrote: > Were you planning on including them in the ar71xx kernel configs via > MODULES_OVERRIDE or some such? =A0If so, that would be sufficient to get > 'make tinderbox' to cover them at least (and hopefully tinderbox builds). > In that case I think it is fine to not have them hooked up in the main > sys/modules build. =A0Or rather, if Warner commits his KERNOPTS thing, pe= rhaps > you could make sys/modules/Makefile include them on appropriate SoC kerne= ls > only. Yup that was the plan - include them in MODULES_OVERRIDE for the appropriate kernels. Adrian