Superseded by c0bed9bd0bda .

In D49215#1125347, @ziaee wrote:

@gallatin, sir sorry to trouble you, if this memoriam is acceptable to you, with the permission of my mentors I will merge this.

Approved.

In D47514#1122729, @mmel wrote:

Unfortunately, the assumption about "In all the devices we currently support, the clock names in the "clock-output-names" property" is clearly incorrect. The documented binding for the A10/A20 does not allow any of these clocks. so this breaks every single A10/A20 board...

Additionally, the required and maximum number of items in the clock-output names depends on the platform, so comparing fixed to 3 doesn't look right either.

Simplify license text (use SPDX/remove boilerplate).

Can you confirm the git author field?

Thanks, I will take this.

Have you performed a MFC yet? Please reach out if you need any guidance there.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

kern.console appears to be a RW sysctl variable, but not a loader tunable. Often these terms are used interchangeably, as many sysctl variables have a "tunable" flag, which means they can inherit a value from the loader(8) environment. (Arbitrary items in the loader environment can be specified in loader.conf).

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

In D48955#1116722, @ziaee wrote:

May I commit this?

(And Approved.)

Restore the Linux memreserve stuff to arm64 MD code.

Include update to subr_module.c / pretty-printing modinfo fields.

Move definition of child to the start.

In D48848#1114091, @andrew wrote:

Can aw_mmc_helper_cd_handler be called twice at the same time? If so then it could see present && sc->child == NULL twice, if not then it looks like the locking shouldn't be needed as this is the only function to use sc->child.

In D48850#1114253, @hlh_restart.be wrote:

You split the rtsx_card_task() function between MMCCAM and not MMCCAM before introducing your update of the use of device lock.

Approved. The improvements are straightforward. Code owners/page maintainers have had their chance to give feedback. Thanks for your patience.

Yes, this is smarter.

Approved.

For this change you will want to tag it with:

Reviewed by: fernape
Approved by: fernape (ports)
Approved by: mhorne (mentor)

From where are you getting your line-wrap rules? style.mdoc(5) is silent on this, but the existing tendency is to wrap single sentences at 80 characters (the source code limit declared by style(9)), and of course follow the one-line-per-sentence rule (although some man pages break lines semantically).

We can quickly enter bikeshed territory debating something like this, but I must ask, is this workflow real or imagined?

Approved.

In D48508#1106915, @ziaee wrote:

That's so exciting! Unfortunately, I have already failed at the very first step, I didn't fix the approved trailed in the commit log.

In D48488#1106326, @imp wrote:

This has been unused since

commit f7b776917236d24a4ac7aaa19b3595abdd8411f9
Author: Doug Rabson <dfr@FreeBSD.org>
Date:   Sat Apr 8 14:17:18 2000 +0000

    * Factor out the object system from new-bus so that it can be used by
      non-device code.
    * Re-implement the method dispatch to improve efficiency. The new system
      takes about 40ns for a method dispatch on a 300Mhz PII which is only
      10ns slower than a direct function call on the same hardware.

    This changes the new-bus ABI slightly so make sure you re-compile any
    driver modules which you use.

I don't think we're being too hasty removing it. It used to be used a pointer to the compiled ops (method) table.