From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 10 01:41:57 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B3A616A4CF for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:41:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postman.ripe.net (postman.ripe.net [193.0.0.199]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FDB43D60 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 01:41:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marks@dell-laptop.6bone.nl) Received: by postman.ripe.net (Postfix, from userid 8) id 20A064E12B; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:41:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from birch.ripe.net (birch.ripe.net [193.0.1.96]) by postman.ripe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB88F4E109; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:41:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dell-laptop.6bone.nl (cow.ripe.net [193.0.1.239]) by birch.ripe.net (8.12.10/8.11.6) with SMTP id i4A8fsVt012804; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:41:54 +0200 Received: (nullmailer pid 1566 invoked by uid 1001); Mon, 10 May 2004 08:41:49 -0000 Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 10:41:49 +0200 From: Mark Santcroos To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-ID: <20040510084149.GA1518@laptop.6bone.nl> References: <409D614D.7983.2B9BBDF@localhost> <20040508.172554.110767931.imp@bsdimp.com> <409E0D5A.19164.559D04D@localhost> <20040509.080600.122620289.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040509.080600.122620289.imp@bsdimp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Handles: MS6-6BONE, MS18417-RIPE X-RIPE-Spam-Level: X-RIPE-Spam-Status: N 0.000153 / 0.0 / 0.0 / disabled X-RIPE-Signature: 2fbbbe64390e4ba613922adec4f9f6f6 cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cardbus trouble X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Mon, 10 May 2004 08:41:57 -0000 Hi Warner, I probably have the same problem. On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 08:06:00AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > So, give the following patch a spin. Try 3 and 4 if this fails. > Clearly this is a bogus patch from a generic point of view, but it is > good for testing. Tried 1,2,3 and 4, no luck for any. Let me know if you want a dmesg of the failing kernel. Mark