From owner-freebsd-usb@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 14 10:50:20 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-usb@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B144D106564A for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:50:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FC718FC12 for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:50:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0EAoKwb047351 for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:50:20 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q0EAoKiI047345; Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:50:20 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:50:20 GMT Message-Id: <201201141050.q0EAoKiI047345@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-usb@FreeBSD.org From: Hans Petter Selasky Cc: Subject: Re: usb/164090: [umodem] [patch] Add sysctl with ucom unit number X-BeenThere: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Hans Petter Selasky List-Id: FreeBSD support for USB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:50:20 -0000 The following reply was made to PR usb/164090; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Hans Petter Selasky To: Mykhaylo Yehorov Cc: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org, freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: usb/164090: [umodem] [patch] Add sysctl with ucom unit number Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:45:05 +0100 On Saturday 14 January 2012 10:51:07 Mykhaylo Yehorov wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 22:54, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Could you patch ucom_set_pnpinfo_usb() instead, so that such a sysctl is > > created for all ucom devices, not only umodem? > > I guess it will be necessary to remove a sysctl oid from a parent > sysctl tree before destroying ucom structures. > It's would be better to do in ucom_detach() but now there is no a > pointer to a parent device structure from there. > > Now all drivers that use ucom pass a pointer to parent softc structure > to ucom_attach(). > Is there any reason for this? > May be it's would be more useful to pass a pointer to a parent device > structure. > > > Can you explain a bit more how you use this information in your scripts? > > I've got a gps receiver and a mobile phone that supported by the umodem > driver. I can attach its in any order. > So I use sysctl to generate gpsd and ppp configs with appropriate > values of serial port. Ok, I see. And you cannot use the information passed through devd by ucom_set_pnpinfo_usb()? --HPS