From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 19 23:50:06 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 369E116A4CE; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:50:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 19D3243D2F; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:50:06 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mux@freebsd.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1920)
	id 103B35C848; Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 01:50:06 +0200
From: Maxime Henrion <mux@freebsd.org>
To: "Ackerman, Tony" <tony.ackerman@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20041019235005.GB41649@elvis.mu.org>
References: <2726872B7A674F489DDEFB72CE1F670D016EFB22@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2726872B7A674F489DDEFB72CE1F670D016EFB22@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
cc: freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com
cc: tackerman@FreeBSD.org
cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make em(4) use device sysctl tree
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:50:06 -0000

Ackerman, Tony wrote:
> Bruce,
> 	Aren't the calls to sysctl_ctx_free() still required?


They aren't required because the sysctl tree and the sysctl context are
both created by the newbus framework, and also destroyed by the said
framework if a device detaches.  However, your comment made me notice
that Bruce forgot to remove the sysctl_ctx and sysctl_tree fields of the
softc in his patch. :-)

Cheers,
Maxime
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce M Simpson [mailto:bms@spc.org] 
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 3:21 PM
> To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
> Cc: tackerman@FreeBSD.org; freebsdnic@mailbox.cps.intel.com;
> mux@FreeBSD.org
> Subject: [PATCH] Make em(4) use device sysctl tree
> 
> Here is a non-critical patch to bring em(4) into line with other
> drivers, by using the sysctl tree created for each device by the
> bus framework.
> 
> Please review; Thanks.
> BMS
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"