From owner-freebsd-arch  Tue Feb 12 14:56: 1 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from sneakerz.org (sneakerz.org [216.33.66.254])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24FEE37B416
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:55:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sneakerz.org (Postfix, from userid 1023)
	id 798155D006; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:55:44 -0600 (CST)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:55:44 -0600
From: Maxime Henrion <mux@sneakerz.org>
To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>
Subject: Re: Patches to if_loop + the interface cloning framework
Message-ID: <20020212165544.B25374@sneakerz.org>
References: <20020212154828.A25374@sneakerz.org> <20020212143909.B24768@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <20020212143909.B24768@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>; from brooks@one-eyed-alien.net on Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 02:39:09PM -0800
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-arch.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-arch>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-arch>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Brooks Davis (brooks@one-eyed-alien.net) wrote:
> By and large it looks good so far.  I've got a couple minor issues
> though.  First, I think we should at least KASSERT and probably
> just panic if lo_clone_create() failes in loop_modevent since that
> causes the same problem as deleting lo0.

I see your concern but this raises some other questions : if it is so
bad that we have to panic if we're not be able to create the lo0 interface,
then why do we have if_loop available as a module at all ? I'm all for
having a KASSERT() or a panic() in that case, but I'd rather see it in a
SYSINIT after having removed KLD support.

> Also, if there are users of
> the net.nloop out there, we may want to figure out a way to support them
> in stable.  It's always possiable that there aren't any users of
> net.nloop and thus we don't need to worry, but I'd prefer to ask before
> tossing support in stable.  I've got no qualms about ripping in out in
> current.

Yes, I think it would be good to support net.nloop again in -STABLE.  I
can write another patch for this.

Thanks,
Maxime Henrion

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message