From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Jul 24  1:41:16 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from noop.colo.erols.net (noop.colo.erols.net [207.96.1.150])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D3C14DF9
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Sat, 24 Jul 1999 01:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gjp@noop.colo.erols.net)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=noop.colo.erols.net)
	by noop.colo.erols.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
	id 117xJ7-000MQT-00; Sat, 24 Jul 1999 04:37:25 -0400
To: Kazutaka YOKOTA <yokota@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp>
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Patch for Alpha/AXP 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 24 Jul 1999 16:29:23 +0900."
             <199907240729.QAA18269@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp> 
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 04:37:24 -0400
Message-ID: <86208.932805444@noop.colo.erols.net>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote in message ID
<199907240729.QAA18269@zodiac.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp>:
> 
> >Does this look right? Without this patch, my AXP was memory faulting
> >every time it booted, in the dev2udev routine. 
> 
> I am afraid this is not quite right.
> 
> Bruce, Doug and I are currently in discussion to fix this.

Hrm.  Why does the AXP cons.c track udev_t while the x86 verson
doesn't?  As best as I can tell, the AXP doesn't seem to need it any
more than the x86 does, unless I've missed something.

Thanks,

Gary


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message