From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Dec 18 9:49: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mimer.webgiro.com (mimer.webgiro.com [212.209.29.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EA614E74 for ; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:48:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from abial@webgiro.com) Received: by mimer.webgiro.com (Postfix, from userid 66) id 448762DC0A; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:49:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx.webgiro.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 16AE87812; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:49:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx.webgiro.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 118B510E10; Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:49:09 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:49:09 +0100 (CET) From: Andrzej Bialecki To: Zhihui Zhang Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Register a KLD module In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, Zhihui Zhang wrote: > > I have looked at the KLD examples and found out that they boils down to a > DECLARE_MODULE() macro with the subsystem given as SI_SUB_DRIVERS. Is > there any reason for using this particular SI_SUB_DRIVERS? I see another > example at http://www.freebsd.org/~abial/ that uses SI_SUB_EXEC. > > Is this subsystem id really useful for KLDs? KLDs are loaded when we run > the kldload command and the subsystem ids are sorted at boot time. This is not quite true. The KLDs can be loaded by the bootloader. Andrzej Bialecki // WebGiro AB, Sweden (http://www.webgiro.com) // ------------------------------------------------------------------- // ------ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve. http://www.freebsd.org -------- // --- Small & Embedded FreeBSD: http://www.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ ---- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message