Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 18:04:45 +0100 From: Rafal Jaworowski <raj@semihalf.com> To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 171338 for review Message-ID: <901E1717-96CA-4067-928D-06DA5B5D1190@semihalf.com> In-Reply-To: <4B17EEA7.5040502@freebsd.org> References: <200912031658.nB3Gw60w063997@repoman.freebsd.org> <4B17EEA7.5040502@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2009-12-03, at 18:00, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > Since this is the same as the OFW interface, or is supposed to be, = would it make sense to make this be MI in /sys/dev/ofw, attaching with a = low priority to any device with a phandle and OF children? The end goal is something like this, yes -- I want to get it initially = working with FDT and in the next round we can optimize/merge it into = something generic that suits all OF cases. If you have any particular = comments or insight let me know, comments are greatly welcome. Rafal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?901E1717-96CA-4067-928D-06DA5B5D1190>