Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:41:05 -0800 From: Ravi Pokala <rpokala@mac.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r328257 - in head/sys: arm/broadcom/bcm2835 dts/arm modules Message-ID: <607B50C2-883C-4CAB-8860-483EC4E9A668@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfp6t6KrTkp=O7Z9crnAUZhFMr%2BW-92t9S480=OytJdpfg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201801220710.w0M7AUm9091853@repo.freebsd.org> <88258.1516630050@critter.freebsd.dk> <20180122153003.664e1613bbf70ab49c5c1541@bidouilliste.com> <52374125.OgxafgljNu@ralph.baldwin.cx> <89102.1516649067@critter.freebsd.dk> <CANCZdfp6t6KrTkp=O7Z9crnAUZhFMr%2BW-92t9S480=OytJdpfg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I wonder if it would be too noisy if we allowed ->probe() to run on disa=
bled devices and reported something like:
>>=20
>> "foobar0: Matched disabled device <...>"
>>=20
>> (without calling ->attach())
>>=20
>> That way you would know you loaded the right driver, rather than have to=
guess
>=20
> I suspect that would be too noisy. It would be better to just run probe, =
but then have newbus report it's disabled so we never go onto attach.
I think a "Matched disabled device" message under bootverbose would be reas=
onable.
-Ravi (rpokala@)
=EF=BB=BF-----Original Message-----
From: <owner-src-committers@freebsd.org> on behalf of Warner Losh <imp@bsdi=
mp.com>
Date: 2018-01-22, Monday at 11:29
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com>,=
src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, <sv=
n-src-head@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r328257 - in head/sys: arm/broadcom/bcm2835 dts/ar=
m modules
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wr=
ote:
--------
In message <52374125.OgxafgljNu@ralph.baldwin.cx>, John Baldwin writes:
>Create the corresponding device_t but device_disable() it when there
>is a disabled property.
That also removes a couple of boilerplate lines from all FDT device
drivers.
That would be useful, but the status bit is so much more than on/off.=20
>A user can then use 'devctl enable <blah>' to enable
>it before (or even after) loading a device driver.
That would work for me.
I wonder if it would be too noisy if we allowed ->probe() to run
on disabled devices and reported something like:
"foobar0: Matched disabled device <...>"
(without calling ->attach())
That way you would know you loaded the right driver, rather
than have to guess.
I suspect that would be too noisy. It would be better to just run probe, bu=
t then have newbus report it's disabled so we never go onto attach.
Though, there's more fundamental issues at play since FDT is tricky and a l=
ot more interrelated than other enumeration platforms.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?607B50C2-883C-4CAB-8860-483EC4E9A668>