From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May 13 09:06:37 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5E46916A4CE; Thu, 13 May 2004 09:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [168.103.84.182])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id BE9B443D66; Thu, 13 May 2004 09:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4DG6ROd013225;
	Thu, 13 May 2004 10:06:27 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 09:54:00 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20040513.095400.26471613.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: des@des.no
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzpsme4bo5g.fsf@dwp.des.no>
References: <xzp8yfxcrs7.fsf@dwp.des.no>
	<200405130927.01034.dfr@nlsystems.com>
	<xzpsme4bo5g.fsf@dwp.des.no>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
cc: arch@freebsd.org
cc: dfr@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: newbus flaw
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 16:06:37 -0000

In message: <xzpsme4bo5g.fsf@dwp.des.no>
            des@des.no (Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav) writes:
: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> writes:
: > When the old module unloaded, its driver will have detached from th=
e =

: > device which it created. There is no reference to an old driver_t. =
Its =

: > perfectly safe for the new driver to use the old device.
: =

: so why do you say I "shouldn't reset the old driver and desc"?

subr_bus.c does that already on detach.  The association between
devclass and device_t is done just prior to probe being called on a
per device basis.

Warner