From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 3 10:28:03 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A0637B401 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:28:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6935C43FFB for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:28:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com) Received: (qmail 92004 invoked by uid 1000); 3 Jul 2003 17:28:02 -0000 Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:28:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Nate Lawson To: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20030703.052315.32736625.imp@bsdimp.com> Message-ID: <20030703102627.D92002@root.org> References: <20030701103125.R87367@root.org> <3F021133.3040306@kasimir.com> <20030701164231.M88547@root.org> <20030703.052315.32736625.imp@bsdimp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Updated ec-burst.diff patch X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 17:28:03 -0000 On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20030701164231.M88547@root.org> > Nate Lawson writes: > : On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Florian Smeets wrote: > : > I set hw.acpi.ec.burst_mode=0 in loader.conf but when i was trying to > : > chek if it was set to 0 with sysctl hw.acpi.ec.burst_mode i got : > : > > : > flo@lappi [~] 15 #sysctl hw.acpi.ec.burst_mode > : > sysctl: unknown oid 'hw.acpi.ec.burst_mode' > : > : It's a tunable, not a sysctl. So you can only set it in loader.conf. Are > : there any messages when you boot with that in your loader.conf? Would you > : please post a separate dmesg for that case? > > I personally think that all tunable should be read-only (or rw if > possible) sysctls... I'm still not sure why we have both mechanisms. Perhaps a useful approach would be to sweep the tree for tunables and change them to sysctls with appropriate permissions (read-only if in doubt). Then remove the tunable mechanism. Care to put together a patch? -Nate