Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 16:21:25 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: "Jung-uk Kim" <jkim@freebsd.org> Cc: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r215544 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <201011191621.25520.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201011191609.31308.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <201011191943.oAJJhv3i087205@svn.freebsd.org> <201011191609.31308.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, November 19, 2010 4:09:28 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Friday 19 November 2010 02:43 pm, Attilio Rao wrote: > > Author: attilio > > Date: Fri Nov 19 19:43:56 2010 > > New Revision: 215544 > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215544 > > > > Log: > > Scan the list in reverse order for the shutdown handlers of > > loaded modules. This way, when there is a dependency between two > > modules, the handler of the latter probed runs first. > > > > This is a similar approach as the modules are unloaded in the > > same linkerfile. > > > > Sponsored by: Sandvine Incorporated > > Submitted by: Nima Misaghian <nmisaghian at sandvine dot com> > > MFC after: 1 week > > Hmm... It is not directly related but I was thinking about doing > similar things for sys/kern/subr_bus.c. What do you think about the > attached patch? Hmm, the patches for suspend and resume that I had for this took the opposite order, they did suspend in forward order, but resume in backwards order. Like so: --- //depot/vendor/freebsd/src/sys/kern/subr_bus.c 2010-11-17 22:30:24.000000000 0000 +++ //depot/user/jhb/acpipci/kern/subr_bus.c 2010-11-19 17:19:02.000000000 00 @@ -3426,9 +3429,9 @@ TAILQ_FOREACH(child, &dev->children, link) { error = DEVICE_SUSPEND(child); if (error) { - for (child2 = TAILQ_FIRST(&dev->children); - child2 && child2 != child; - child2 = TAILQ_NEXT(child2, link)) + for (child2 = TAILQ_PREV(child, device_list, link); + child2 != NULL; + child2 = TAILQ_PREV(child2, device_list, link)) DEVICE_RESUME(child2); return (error); } @@ -3447,7 +3450,7 @@ { device_t child; - TAILQ_FOREACH(child, &dev->children, link) { + TAILQ_FOREACH_REVERSE(child, &dev->children, device_list, link) { DEVICE_RESUME(child); /* if resume fails, there's nothing we can usefully do... */ } (Likely mangled whitespace.) I couldn't convince myself which order was "more" correct for suspend and resume. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201011191621.25520.jhb>