From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Aug 26 12:22:31 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7083F10752CB for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:22:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from dec.sakura.ne.jp (dec.sakura.ne.jp [210.188.226.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB5CD7F1AA for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:22:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from fortune.joker.local (124-18-127-118.dz.commufa.jp [124.18.127.118]) (authenticated bits=0) by dec.sakura.ne.jp (8.15.2/8.15.2/[SAKURA-WEB]/20080708) with ESMTPA id w7QCMSFp011200 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 21:22:28 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 21:22:28 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: priority of paths to kernel modules? Message-Id: <20180826212228.f7dff763c78ead18a356a206@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: References: <201808241411.w7OEBXg8095140@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Reply-To: junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp Organization: Junchoon corps X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd11.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:22:31 -0000 +1. If modules needed are recognized correctly and specified with full-path like /boot/modules/drm.ko, the priority wouldn't matter. On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:29:19 -0600 Warner Losh wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 4:20 PM Niclas Zeising wrote: > > > On 08/24/18 17:20, Warner Losh wrote: > > > This would allow the graphics port to have a rc script that sets > > > this up so when X11 goes to automatically load the module, the right one > > > gets loaded. > > > > > > > I just want to point out that X11 doesn't load the graphics kernel > > driver by default when using the drm-*-kmod ports, and I'm not sure the > > hack to have the intel ddx (xf86-video-intel) load the drm2 driver is > > still around. > > > > It doesn't really matter though, since upstream is moving away from > > having X load the driver, and I'd like us to follow suit by using > > devmatch (this is one of the reasons we wanted to get rid of the base > > drivers, as I've stated before). X can't always know which driver to > > load (when using modesetting for instance), and in my opinion, it should > > be the kernel/loader that decides which drivers to load. > > > Excellent. That reduces the compatibility matrix I need to consider. I have > some ideas, and will hack on them to see if a clever bit of slide of hand > will solve the main problem of loading the wrong driver in a dependency > chain. > > Warner > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Tomoaki AOKI