From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 1 19:02:48 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72CF4738 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2014 19:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30A3967 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2014 19:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id hi2so18434853wib.17 for ; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 11:02:40 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LXzlJU6Zl1PZxZdq4K4ozU4ujGcRB+yzbPvPO1i0tnw=; b=BF4gfkauskR1TEgx7eRNNsMsydCj/XPmvlRi4/HgkIIXEQr/ARQe0hx+RuBoHDlgNP CHPPrEUJFWluj6BaGdw0f5K4DwX+g8ihJ2QAoDeYboQKv7Vcyjdv4wb/FNEsW+Wztpc+ ePFg/BmOYUigF2WhKx8GIDFYbIHEmD/olqhcriuIEuYwb7gVlckDx249HA7QtX4Za2Bj JNwquHmhhhcDC1Khco8RZ2/OAS3JzWYBlze1hV9T5V3eW+zTWv99QxEGbeMz+jh1mtbX 13CsQPka/cAtrhzPEDWjtSVzWhaZpbD/kKkRz2WfUC/r4N+MMIZVtoT012a93YyS6v29 rShw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmJodw6aKFlpNVizFoQXq7EBwpaM0HFnUznOwjSY4XbCEX6syB8r7pWX1i2T1X0kyr6s8ob X-Received: by 10.180.211.84 with SMTP id na20mr6659584wic.41.1417460560128; Mon, 01 Dec 2014 11:02:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.68] (82-69-141-170.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.141.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id eq4sm10289531wjd.42.2014.12.01.11.02.38 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Dec 2014 11:02:39 -0800 (PST) From: Steven Hartland X-Google-Original-From: Steven Hartland Message-ID: <547CBBC9.2070408@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 19:04:41 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alfred Perlstein , Hans Petter Selasky Subject: Re: svn commit: r275136 - in head/sys: dev/e1000 dev/ixgbe kern sys References: <201411262019.sAQKJaw4043557@svn.freebsd.org> <39377603.10OyiSzjWY@ralph.baldwin.cx> <872C180A-6ADD-469F-A801-3728DF134EEC@mu.org> <547C88A9.1070007@selasky.org> <5E1B6CD4-BBA7-4AD0-9982-E981015AF138@mu.org> <547C8A9C.4080603@selasky.org> <547C8CA2.8040305@selasky.org> <547C8DEF.5020809@selasky.org> <547C974A.9050302@selasky.org> <4CE4C10D-93B0-4E27-878D-34C0A7CF3C94@mu.org> <547C995A.2060005@selasky.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , Alfred Perlstein , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , John Baldwin X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 19:02:48 -0000 On 01/12/2014 16:46, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > >> On Dec 1, 2014, at 8:37 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I think you maybe missed a point .... >> >>> On 12/01/14 17:31, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>> >>> Yes that is why it is being done by hand in the probe routine. I think proper thing might be a way to sort out how to get tunables to run at a driver load event? Is that possible? >> All sysctls are tried init when they are created, both so-called "static" and "dynamic" ones. >> >> If the sysctl is created inside the probe routine and has the tunable flag set, it will get init before the creation is complete, if present in the boot environment. >> >> If the sysctl is of a "static" kind, it will be created and initialized when SI_SUB_KMEM is executing! > I totally understand this. It is in the phabricator review. :) > As a more general comment, my personal preference when I ask for review is that at least one of the reviewers accepts the final revision before I commit, but preferably all that have taken part in the discussion. This often takes a bit longer and some times takes a little prodding but should be worth it in the long run. I know I commented on this one but I unfortunately didn't get chance to look after changes where made and hence never accepted the revision. Had I done so I would have caveat-ed it with it being accepted by Jack or other Intel delegate in his absence, so sorry about that Jack. No one should take this personally, as know this is still new to everyone, but it does raise the wider question of who should be counted as a "reviewer" from phabric and do we need some additional guidelines on this, or even better can it be automated? Regards Steve