From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 4 01:17:11 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EC6516A4BF; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 01:17:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1241543FEA; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 01:17:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from mailgate.nlsystems.com ([80.177.232.242] helo=herring.nlsystems.com) by anchor-post-32.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 19upIj-000KsR-0W; Thu, 04 Sep 2003 09:17:09 +0100 Received: from [10.0.0.2] (herring.nlsystems.com [10.0.0.2]) by herring.nlsystems.com (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h848GsYW092610; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 09:16:55 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) From: Doug Rabson To: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20030903.194045.71089689.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <200309030740.h837e4qS056204@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030903.194045.71089689.imp@bsdimp.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1062663414.86530.15.camel@herring.nlsystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0 Date: 04 Sep 2003 09:16:54 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_XIMIAN version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: phk@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/pci if_sis.c if_sisreg.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 08:17:11 -0000 On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 02:40, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <200309030740.h837e4qS056204@repoman.freebsd.org> > Poul-Henning Kamp writes: > : We can't update the device description in attach (why not ?), so > : we device_print() what we find. > > You can. However, we use the description after PROBE, and changing it > in attach doesn't cause us to go back and unprint it, so it does > little good. We could fix this, and the resource allocation issues, > by printing things after a successful attach, but that would likely > confuse people. We could also move the print to after attach. That might alleviate some of the confusion when an attach fails - in the log, it looks like the device exists. On the other hand, that wouldn't work - some attach methods print stuff and many create probe and attach other stuff. For specific drivers, if they really want to change the device description in attach (why not do it in probe like every other driver), they could mark the device as quiet and then explicitly call device_print_child after they have massaged the device.