From owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 3 17:21:32 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767) id 7EE6010656A7; Thu, 3 Dec 2009 17:21:32 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 439B710656A4 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2009 17:21:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raj@semihalf.com) Received: from smtp.semihalf.com (smtp.semihalf.com [213.17.239.109]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89FA8FC19 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2009 17:21:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [213.17.239.109]) by smtp.semihalf.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C129C42CA; Thu, 3 Dec 2009 18:04:25 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at semihalf.com Received: from smtp.semihalf.com ([213.17.239.109]) by localhost (smtp.semihalf.com [213.17.239.109]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9IHhmpsfJkNT; Thu, 3 Dec 2009 18:04:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from [10.0.0.34] (cardhu.semihalf.com [213.17.239.108]) by smtp.semihalf.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82682C4275; Thu, 3 Dec 2009 18:04:24 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Rafal Jaworowski In-Reply-To: <4B17EEA7.5040502@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 18:04:45 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <901E1717-96CA-4067-928D-06DA5B5D1190@semihalf.com> References: <200912031658.nB3Gw60w063997@repoman.freebsd.org> <4B17EEA7.5040502@freebsd.org> To: Nathan Whitehorn X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Cc: Perforce Change Reviews Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 171338 for review X-BeenThere: p4-projects@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: p4 projects tree changes List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:21:32 -0000 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