a...@absd.org (David Brownlee) writes:
>Is the ignoring of attach priority a general characteristic of
>indirect buses, and might it make sense for config to be able to
>explicitly prioritise the order the cfdata[] entries? I know uebayasi@
>has been rototilling config and wondered if he could be
Joerg Sonnenberger writes:
>> Yes, of course. Should I submit it as a bug report with a known
>> workaround, and then you (or someone) close it as a "won't fix",
>> thus leaving it saved and searchable?
>
> Yeah, that was the idea.
Done. kern/49711.
-tih
--
Popularity is the hallmark of medi
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 01:50:34PM +0100, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger writes:
>
> > Just in case others run into it, you can put the patch you are running
> > into GNATS?
>
> Yes, of course. Should I submit it as a bug report with a known
> workaround, and then you (or someon
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 01:08:04PM +, David Brownlee wrote:
> On 28 February 2015 at 09:44, matthew green wrote:
> >
> >
> > hi folks.
> >
> > i've been trying to find a least-ugly solution to the radeondrmkms
> > on i386 problem. quick summary of what's wrong:
> >
> > radeondrmkms do
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 07:19:35PM +, Iain Hibbert wrote:
> This type of DPRINTF is very common. They were for the original
> developer, or someone who needs to track down an obscure runtime bug.
> [...]
> at the very least, leave all the DPRINTFs until later
I just wanted to close this thread
On 28 February 2015 at 09:44, matthew green wrote:
>
>
> hi folks.
>
> i've been trying to find a least-ugly solution to the radeondrmkms
> on i386 problem. quick summary of what's wrong:
>
> radeondrmkms doesn't complete attachments (and most
> importantly create a wsdisplay) unt
Joerg Sonnenberger writes:
> Just in case others run into it, you can put the patch you are running
> into GNATS?
Yes, of course. Should I submit it as a bug report with a known
workaround, and then you (or someone) close it as a "won't fix",
thus leaving it saved and searchable?
I've already
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 09:47:10AM +0100, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger writes:
>
> > If it still generates interrupts, there is not much we can do. I do not
> > believe turning off interrupts on the PIC is in any way appropiate.
>
> I've been running with your uhci polled mode
Joerg Sonnenberger writes:
> If it still generates interrupts, there is not much we can do. I do not
> believe turning off interrupts on the PIC is in any way appropiate.
I've been running with your uhci polled mode hack for some time, now, in
SMP mode, and it's nice and stable. I'll maintain i
