From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct 26 07:25:24 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86AB106564A
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:25:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dk@mail.neveragain.de)
Received: from mail.neveragain.de (mail.neveragain.de [IPv6:2001:aa8:fffc::25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7600B8FC12
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:25:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.neveragain.de (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id 6C94017028; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 09:25:23 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 09:25:23 +0200
From: Dennis Koegel <dk@neveragain.de>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20111026072523.GA89177@neveragain.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Subject: isp(4) WWNs / ISP2532
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:25:24 -0000

Cheers,

we have a "Qlogic ISP 2532 PCI FC-AL Adapter" here, on 9.0-RC1, which
seems to work fine with isp(4).

But: We had some trouble finding the WWNs -- per man page, there should
be sysctl entries like dev.isp.N.{wwnn,wwpn}, but they ain't here. dmesg
didn't show them either.

Booting verbose does print them.

Is the man page outdated, or a strange behaviour because this chip
isn't explicitly supported?

Thanks,
- D.