From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 12 02:00:21 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94A6ABF7 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 02:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-f45.google.com (mail-pb0-f45.google.com [209.85.160.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65D0D1F15 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 02:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f45.google.com with SMTP id rp16so11084503pbb.4 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:00:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=n1tq1s6qmtq8IyzkV+WBqltGNSvykCxHVYdmj9LIpzk=; b=XWU/ajkwPq2yBunLKDHvW3QKgOm2qJCrrUaEBtg+zyLyoDR4nTm7pHuCMrMK017CGG S6bhLY/raXI2Haip93DiHLmqsFFmPDSeY4KeS0hbW3LdcRLUzQSbnToTkPFtzWejVo0J vMW/ja+PF27N941p6OSqLqv8SIfEmV56igpkvflnpmba6WYYSZ5udotLLrrW1qc4YZVm uDl5SO/fpmzl00yeYolGg1G8eEKAvKYL6LuzFWGfAUK5RgU5SyRVet1tocgf4+dF8Th+ tyb0JgIN2htTllmBAx69w1IhOumnPb0H7KDHt5w2eNwffOv+Gw1SFKuXGQw4v1zt36DW GOVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmVSsuG5OIC+rFfgqFqXMEkSZgzXSGKyDpGdwN9XzSS/uTonH+hX8YUb8Mi465QDECzsHaI X-Received: by 10.68.106.69 with SMTP id gs5mr6913172pbb.87.1386813615201; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:00:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (c-50-156-22-197.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [50.156.22.197]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id rz6sm49737618pab.22.2013.12.11.18.00.13 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:00:14 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\)) Subject: Re: Request for testing an alternate branch From: Tim Kientzle In-Reply-To: <201312111626.12035.jhb@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:05:21 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <65DF58AD-1058-4FA6-84DE-436AB0BB17F9@kientzle.com> References: <20131204222113.39fb23dd@zhabar.gateway.2wire.net> <201312111626.12035.jhb@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822) Cc: Justin Hibbits , FreeBSD current , FreeBSD PowerPC ML X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 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, 12 Dec 2013 02:00:21 -0000 On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:26 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > Also, I'm still not a fan of the EAGAIN approach. I'd rather have a = method > in bus_if.m to suspend or resume a single device and to track that a = device > is suspended or resumed via a device_t flag or some such. (I think I = had > suggested this previously as it would also allow us to have a tool to > suspend/resume individual drivers at runtime apart from a full = suspend/resume > request). Anything that made it easier to test suspend/resume would be a huge bonus. Tim