Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea...
From: M. Warner Losh (imp_at_bsdimp.com)
Date: 07/21/04
- Previous message: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- Next in thread: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- Reply: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:49:26 -0600 (MDT) To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk
[[ only cc'd arch@ ]]
In message: <83182.1090412961@critter.freebsd.dk>
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
: >Any ideas on how network interfaces should
: >work in this?
:
: I talked with Robert briefly about this yesterday, and the problem
: there is that struct ifnet is embedded in the softc. If the softc
: had a pointer to the ifnet, then we could do something similar, but
: as long as it's embedded we're stuck.
Why is that the case? We don't detach the ifnet stuff after deleting
the softc. Why would a pointer to ifnet in the softc make this
easier?
I mean, I understand that having a pointer would insulate the size of
ifnet from the driver, but there's so many offsets in ifnet that are
encoded in the driver that doesn't seem that big a win.
Warner
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- In reply to: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- Next in thread: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- Reply: Poul-Henning Kamp: "Re: kldunload DIAGNOSTIC idea..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
