From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 5 21:33:42 2005 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 6E04116A4CE for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2005 21:33:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 102FA43D49 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2005 21:33:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.254.12] (g4.samsco.home [192.168.254.12]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j05LaWd6019007; Wed, 5 Jan 2005 14:36:32 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <41DC5D2D.8040308@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:33:33 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roman Kurakin References: <41DB08B9.6090801@savvis.net> <41DB1310.4060807@cronyx.ru> <41DB1700.7060708@savvis.net> <41DB1839.9080104@elischer.org> <41DC4FA2.8070609@savvis.net> <41DC5398.8020508@freebsd.org> <41DC5561.4090005@savvis.net> <41DC5690.3090205@freebsd.org> <41DC5910.8030905@cronyx.ru> In-Reply-To: <41DC5910.8030905@cronyx.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on pooker.samsco.org cc: current@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer Subject: Re: netgraph(4) initialization order 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: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 21:33:42 -0000 Roman Kurakin wrote: > Scott Long: > >> Maksim Yevmenkin wrote: >> >>> Scott Long wrote: >>> >>>> Maksim Yevmenkin wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear Hackers, >>>>> >>>>> any objections to the attached patch? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, as I stated in another email, I think that the core netgraph >>>> module should be initialized before the SI_SUB_DRIVERS step. I >>>> propose creating a new sysinit called SI_SUB_NETGRAPH with a value >>>> of 0x30100000. That way it comes after SI_SUB_IF and before >>>> SI_SUB_DRIVERS. This make fiddling with SI_ORDER_* unneccesary. >>> >>> >>> >>> how about new attached patch? >>> >>> thanks, >>> max >> >> >> >> Exactly what I had in mind =-) Have you tested this out to make sure >> it fixes the problem cases? > > > But this wouldn't save from the same problem it the future. > > rik > What same problem? This ensures that the netgraph core gets initialized before any driver. Keeping it at SI_SUB_DRIVERS and trying to order the it via SI_ORDER_* is risky because you can't guarantee that some other driver won't try to also take SI_ORDER_FIRST. Scott