Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 22:24:23 +0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFT: if_ath HAL refactoring Message-ID: <AANLkTimQJ8RCc4pxPv1FdP60omiSCCvyvBzwNNK6byQa@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201009210919.28923.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <AANLkTikZUZ3%2BW%2Bikyiiw-L-X5v4t4EgTNF4vFf4w=oyK@mail.gmail.com> <201009200925.10362.jhb@freebsd.org> <AANLkTi=7t=KKbHc2TJRsA=43t7eQtpshQVqyXT-aXMM4@mail.gmail.com> <201009210919.28923.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21 September 2010 21:19, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: >> I've not idea right now whether there's an Atheros SoC with an >> AHB-attached wireless device and a PCI bus. In fact, that won't work >> at the present time because the device names would clash. > > Why would the device names clash? =A0We have _lots_ of drivers with multi= ple bus > attachments that use the same name regardless of which bus they are on, a= nd > making a bus attachment conditional on the bus being present is what ever= y > other driver that desires this level of granularity does. Cool. Well, that's one less thing I have to worry about. :-) Thanks, Adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTimQJ8RCc4pxPv1FdP60omiSCCvyvBzwNNK6byQa>