Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 19:40:08 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: George Neville-Neil <gnn@neville-neil.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Anuranjan Shukla <anshukla@juniper.net> Subject: Re: Proposal for changes to network device drivers and network stack (RFC) Message-ID: <3465231B-CEC2-4FC1-92EF-95C535EFCBED@xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <570F1A37-38F0-41CF-91C7-B6047AA79E97@neville-neil.com> References: <CC5C760E.18207%anshukla@juniper.net> <570F1A37-38F0-41CF-91C7-B6047AA79E97@neville-neil.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:16 PM, George Neville-Neil <gnn@neville-neil.com> = wrote: > One more note. Can you break the patches down into more bite sized = pieces? They're hard > to review as is. Following up finally. Let's focus on the device driver interface. I renamed the interface implementation from mumble_ddi.h to if_device.[ch] and put a diff here: http://people.freebsd.org/~marcel/Juniper/if_device.diff To see how it's used and/or how it changes a device driver, look at a diff to if_em.c here: http://people.freebsd.org/~marcel/Juniper/if_em.diff Some notes: 1. Yes, there needs a license at the top. It's 2-clause BSD 2. The function pointers are macros right now. I think it's better to have an ops structure and a single function to set the ops than a bunch of accessors to set functions. 3. The code needs to be tidied up. What I'd like to see is a discussion on the functions themselves. They're the result of looking at a single driver (or maybe 2 drivers), and as such may not be perfectly generic or logical. As said before: we'd like to focus on an ABI-stable interface, but a one based on macros should also be possible. Sorry for the delay, --=20 Marcel Moolenaar marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3465231B-CEC2-4FC1-92EF-95C535EFCBED>