On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
BD>All are within other code. One example is in dev/mii/brgphy.c which a
BD>phy feature is not enabled when it is attached to some MACs. A messier
BD>example is in the new ATM code where interfaces are looked up by name.
Where is this?
harti
BD>In all
Brooks Davis wrote:
Not today, since none of them get used in the paths that do this. In
general the network code doesn't care what you call an interface. There
are a few corners where it does, but nothing that isn't specific to
a certain set of drivers. Additionally, it is necessary to not hav
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
BD>On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 09:34:22AM +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:
BD>> On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
BD>>
BD>> BD>All are within other code. One example is in dev/mii/brgphy.c which a
BD>> BD>phy feature is not enabled when it is attached to some
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 09:34:22AM +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Brooks Davis wrote:
>
> BD>All are within other code. One example is in dev/mii/brgphy.c which a
> BD>phy feature is not enabled when it is attached to some MACs. A messier
> BD>example is in the new ATM code wh
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
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 01:14:39PM -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 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
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
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
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 interface or NULL
> if there is no device (or if there was not
16 matches
Mail list logo