allow to mange KBD_DELAY1 and KBD_DELAY2 via kernconf (GH PR649)

[fbsd_paepcke.de]

Summary

see https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/649

[some CI tests in GitHub CI still fail because of some recent tool chain changes] [this diff exists to enable to proof successful build via internal CI]

• allow to configure KBD_DELAY[1|2] via KERNCONF to bypass (strict) fixed value option sets within kbdcontrol and allow to manage without user land for embedded/security appliances, similar to the other existing KBD_ kernel options.

• rename existing instances from KB_DELAY* consistently to KBD_DELAY*

• add docs

• no change in existing behavior,

If this gets accepted, I can add a new PR to enhance kbdcontrol as well.
Promise! You will love your new snappy & fast interactive console setup options!

[fbsd_paepcke.de]

Updates:

• rename existing instances of KB_DELAY* to KBD_DELAY and expose them via options
• add docu

[imp]

This looks generally good.
As I said on the pull request, I have two bits of feedback.
(1) I'd note this in UPDATING. It's an obscure option, so this will document the change
(2) It would be cool to add them to atkbdc.4 to document these.

[fbsd_paepcke.de]

updates done for atkbc.4 and UPDATING as requested,
added (optional) NOTES entries as proposal

[imp]

In D38603#880768, @fbsd_paepcke.de wrote:

updates done for atkbc.4 and UPDATING as requested,
added (optional) NOTES entries as proposal

Can you double check that the diff you uploaded is the one you intended? This comment doesn't match the ukbd.4 changes in this review.

[fbsd_paepcke.de]

In D38603#880776, @imp wrote:

In D38603#880768, @fbsd_paepcke.de wrote:

updates done for atkbc.4 and UPDATING as requested,
added (optional) NOTES entries as proposal

Can you double check that the diff you uploaded is the one you intended? This comment doesn't match the ukbd.4 changes in this review.

Im SORRY for the confusion, its PR649 in github now.

https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/649

I smashed PR647 in favor for PR649, because the github web interface
still lacks to all the basic features (eg. git reset ... / git rebase ..) that the
native tool chain offers.

( There goes my dream to upstream git-less smaller requests via webinterface only. )

[fbsd_paepcke.de]

Can you double check that the diff you uploaded is the one you intended? This comment doesn't match the ukbd.4 changes in this review.

... oh, you mean the different values?

Yes, I just tried to adapt. kbdc.4 mentions the default values, so I copied this
behavior to blend into the existing conext.

While ukbd.4 used real world examples all over the place, ignoring to repeat the defaults.

So I tried to stay a consistent within the document.
I do not want to open that can of worms ...