From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep 18 07:40:26 2003
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 EA74116A4BF; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 07:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7615343FE5; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 07:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.9/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h8IEeNTX004265;
	Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:40:23 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:40:25 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20030918.084025.71552256.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: dfr@nlsystems.com
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <1063881095.12179.5.camel@builder02.qubesoft.com>
References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030917161519.51283B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
	<1063881095.12179.5.camel@builder02.qubesoft.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.2 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: bms@spc.org
cc: phk@phk.freebsd.dk
cc: rwatson@freebsd.org
cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: devd limitations / automounting removable storage
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, 18 Sep 2003 14:40:27 -0000

In message: <1063881095.12179.5.camel@builder02.qubesoft.com>
            Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> writes:
: Surely the right thing would be to use the same wheel (newbus) for all
: the probing, driver auction, device attachment jobs in the kernel. That
: would seemlessly allow devd to receive device notification events for
: geom's leaf partitions in exactly the same way that it receives all
: other notification events.

I tend to agree with the CAM/ata controller bit.  Both were written
before newbus was well integrated into the tree.  It makes no sense
that fdc has an fd newbus child but ata doesn't have an ad child.

However, having said that, I think we do need additional event types
because we're doing with different name spaces.  But those events
might be in devd rather than devctl given that we can get those events
in userland in other ways if my investigations are OK.

Warner