The control flow here is also a bit weird, would make more sense to me as:

while (resource_find_dev(...) == 0 && !wired) {
    if (...) {
        wired = true;
    }
    ...
    if (...) {
        wired = true;
    }
}
if (wired)
    unit = dunit;

Or probably !wired && resource_find_dev(...) == 0 so it doesn't mess with dunit after wired becomes true

Yea, maybe true. Also true that it likely is more likely to introduce a new bug. I'll look at making that structural change in a separate commit that i can take more time to validate so there aren't other hidden dragons... like the fact that we hit continue and reset wired to false which would
break your suggested reordering. Otherwise we would just do 'break' at that point.

I see, initially read it as iterating over property names and thus only one would ever be true... but indeed that's not what it does. Agreed it's not for this diff.