From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 26 12:37:55 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E47316A4CE
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:37:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 684DB43D31
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:37:54 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i1QKbnpY003046;
	Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:37:49 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:59:04 MST."
             <20040226.125904.08946359.imp@bsdimp.com> 
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:37:49 +0100
Message-ID: <3045.1077827869@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: des@des.no
cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: per-device sysctls 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:37:55 -0000

In message <20040226.125904.08946359.imp@bsdimp.com>, "M. Warner Losh" writes:
>In message: <xzp8yipk4gh.fsf@dwp.des.no>
>            des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes:
>: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
>: > Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?= writes:
>: > > "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> writes:
>: > > > That is a good reason to transitioning to this, so long as we can come
>: > > > up with a good way to represent detached nodes.
>: > > As long as they have a device_t, it should be a piece of cake.
>: > Having a device_t is a property of having hardware, not of being a
>: > device driver.
>: 
>: I believe that by "detached nodes", Warner means hardware that does
>: not have a driver.
>
>They have a device_t, however.  All nodes in the tree have a device_t
>(kind of by definition). Not all nodes in the tree have a devclass
>associated with their device_t (eg, not all devices are attached).
>this is why you'll see lots of 'unknown' nodes in the devinfo output.

GEOM, NETGRAPH pty, tun, tap, nmdm and similar have no newbus
infestation and there would have to really good reasons to infest them.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.