[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Suspend broken (6.99.40, swcrypto)
In article <Pine.NEB.4.64.1404130652200.9475%screamer.whooppee.com@localhost>,
Paul Goyette <paul%whooppee.com@localhost> wrote:
>Hmmm, not quite so trivial as you might thing. pmf_device_register()
>needs to have the device_t as the first argument.
>swcrypto attaches using config_attach_pseudo(), which as far as I can
>tell ends up calling the swcryptoattach(int) initialization routine.
>This routine doesn't get passed a device_t so nothing available to give
>to pmf_device_register() ...
There is "self" in swcrypto_attach so you could put the pmf_stuff there.
>Other pseudo devices which already handle pmf_device_register() (for
>example, cgd, vnd, fss) are attached with calls to devsw_attach() which
>seems to call the othe initialization routine xxx_attach(device_t,
>device_t void *) (as declared in the CFATTACH_DECL).
>None of the refactoring changes I made to swcrypto removed anything, so
>this failure-to-suspend should have been a pre-existing condition.
>It is also not clear to me why crypto0 is not also listed as lacking pmf
>support... (Its attachment seems to call both devsw_attach() and
>config_attach_pseudo(), but nowhere does it call pmf_device_register()!)
Same there. Give it a try.
Main Index |
Thread Index |