Since there are some objections to this proposal, I have an alternative
one for consideration. I would add two new members to ifnet, if_dname
and if_dunit, containing the driver name and unit which would be similar
to the current if_name and if_unit with the exception that if_dunit
would be an int
< said:
> The internals of struct device are not contained in
Unfortunately, the internals of `device_t' are. That's why style(9)
discourages such types.
-GAWollman
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 02:23:02PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 30-Sep-2003 Brooks Davis wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 01:14:39PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>
> >> Fair enough. I think that Brooks planned to use a NULL device_t for
> >> interfaces w/o a backing new-bus device. Howe
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 07:56:41PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks Davis writes:
>
> >> Somebody please explain how this would work for non-hardware
> >> interfaces like if_loop, if_tun, if_tap etc ?
> >
> >if_dev would be NULL when a device_t was not avail
On 30-Sep-2003 Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 01:14:39PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>> Fair enough. I think that Brooks planned to use a NULL device_t for
>> interfaces w/o a backing new-bus device. However, that means you
>> still need if_name for all the non-newbus devices,
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks Davis writes:
>> Somebody please explain how this would work for non-hardware
>> interfaces like if_loop, if_tun, if_tap etc ?
>
>if_dev would be NULL when a device_t was not available. Code which used
>this feature would be required to either check that if_
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:10:54AM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Vincent Jardin writes:
> >Le Mardi 30 Septembre 2003 03:03, Brooks Davis a écrit :
> >> [Previously posted to -net in another form.]
> >>
> >> I propose to add an if_dev member to struct ifnet. It
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 01:14:34PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 30-Sep-2003 Bruce Evans wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
> >
> >> On 30-Sep-2003 Bruce Evans wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
> >> >> Unfortunately, "soon" hasn't happened yet and it is n
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 01:14:39PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> Fair enough. I think that Brooks planned to use a NULL device_t for
> interfaces w/o a backing new-bus device. However, that means you
> still need if_name for all the non-newbus devices, so this seems
> somewhat pointless if if_n
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 09:22, Bruce Evans wrote:
> That's one alternative. (Far too) many places already use the simple
> alternative of just using "struct device *". Grep shows 68 lines
> containing "struct device" in *.h and 32 in *.c. For "device_t", the
> numbers are 2140 in *.h and 5089 in
On 30-Sep-2003 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Baldwin writes:
>
Yes, if it helps to remove if_name/if_unit, it is a thing to do. Moreover it
sounds a good idea to have the if_dev field into the ifnet structure.
>>>
>>> Somebody please explain how this wo
On 30-Sep-2003 Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>> On 30-Sep-2003 Bruce Evans wrote:
>> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
>> >> Unfortunately, "soon" hasn't happened yet and it is now tripping me
>> >> up. To add the if_dev member to struct ifnet (see the
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 30-Sep-2003 Bruce Evans wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, "soon" hasn't happened yet and it is now tripping me
> >> up. To add the if_dev member to struct ifnet (see the forthcoming
> >> post on that subject), it
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Baldwin writes:
>>>Yes, if it helps to remove if_name/if_unit, it is a thing to do. Moreover it
>>>sounds a good idea to have the if_dev field into the ifnet structure.
>>
>> Somebody please explain how this would work for non-hardware
>> interfaces like if_l
On 30-Sep-2003 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Vincent Jardin writes:
>>Le Mardi 30 Septembre 2003 03:03, Brooks Davis a écrit :
>>> [Previously posted to -net in another form.]
>>>
>>> I propose to add an if_dev member to struct ifnet. It would be of type
>>> device_t
On 30-Sep-2003 Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
>
>> Six years and eight months ago, net/if.h was split into if.h and
>> if_var.h. At the time, if_var.h was included at the end if if.h as
>> follows (this is the current code, but it's equivalent):
>>
>> #ifdef _KERNE
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
> Six years and eight months ago, net/if.h was split into if.h and
> if_var.h. At the time, if_var.h was included at the end if if.h as
> follows (this is the current code, but it's equivalent):
>
> #ifdef _KERNEL
> struct thread;
>
> /* XXX - this should
On Tuesday 30 September 2003 09:27, Juan Rodriguez Hervella wrote:
> On Monday 29 September 2003 19:22, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
> > > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:59:08 +0200,
> > > Juan Rodriguez Hervella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >
> > > I've got two routers sending RAs on the same link
On Monday 29 September 2003 19:22, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:59:08 +0200,
> > Juan Rodriguez Hervella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >
> > I've got two routers sending RAs on the same link, so the
> > host is configured with two IPv6 prefix on the same NIC.
> >
> >
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Vincent Jardin writes:
>Le Mardi 30 Septembre 2003 03:03, Brooks Davis a écrit :
>> [Previously posted to -net in another form.]
>>
>> I propose to add an if_dev member to struct ifnet. It would be of type
>> device_t and be defined to point to the device for the in
20 matches
Mail list logo
