Address review comments

This looks ok, but I will have to admit that diff3 was always a bit of a mystery box. Please update the comment, but assuming tests don't start failing I'm willing to bet this is an improvement.

Address review comments

rebase

remove sleeps

remove fifo configuration and delays

• correct NMM clock sizes to be 8 rather than 7 bits

In D9157#1257822, @bms wrote:

In D9157#1203022, @lwhsu wrote:

For more information, check D51299 and https://people.allbsd.org/~hrs/FreeBSD/udbc/

I can't seem to access this udbc URL you have quoted above, and it's not in the Wayback Machine either. If it matters, I route all my traffic via Mullvad VPN and I'm based in a semi-rural area of Scotland at the moment.

I'm in touch with a German vendor for DbC cables, Lauterbach. Importing the cables into UK will be difficult post-Brexit. Microsoft's suggested vendor, DataPro.net, will not accept orders below 200USD for non-VAT registered entities.

I have a limited company formation pending, so I may be able to obtain a small batch for UK-based committers to work with at cost.

P.S. I was very sorry to learn of Hans' passing, albeit belatedly. I just regained Phabricator access after a nearly 8 year hiatus due to health issues and family bereavement. Long story. I have contacted core-secretary@ about this.

Thanks for the heads up I'll update those too.

• address review comments

Rebase (well manually port) changes up to CURRENT from 7 years ago.

Sure, I've put it on my todo list

• Add a comment labelling the Doorbell
• The Device address field is 7 bits wide rather than 3 bits

It wasn't clear from out last conversation if this is ready for review or if there is more related work.

• Correct DC SBR bit definition
• Change doorbell field definition and remove get method

In D53904#1231939, @imp wrote:

So I'd like to see the loader patches too before this lands. This strikes me as doing this all wrong, but maybe I'm just missing something.

This looks great to me, some small nits for which I have made comments.

In D53893#1231126, @adrian wrote:

looks good to me but the lack of mutexes anywhere is suspicious. ;-)

This is fine to me, I'm not sure what adrian means with his outstanding item, but we can just keep hitting iwx with a stick until we are happy.

Please update the bits available comment below keymgmt when you land this

Looks good to me

I am happy with all three revisions and echo the comments from rgrimes and jtl on a single review and the impact being documented.

This seems ok to me, if it doesn't smoke and you can still do vht then its a good step forward