Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2006 00:20:57 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: jhb@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org, takawata@init-main.com, atkin901@yahoo.com Subject: Re: acpi on msi-9218 (-current) swaps sio0 and sio1 Message-ID: <20060709.002057.58455516.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <200607071428.27775.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200607071738.k67HcmJG006425@ns.init-main.com> <200607071428.27775.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <200607071428.27775.jhb@freebsd.org>
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
: On Friday 07 July 2006 13:38, Takanori Watanabe wrote:
: > In message <200607071240.57062.jhb@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin $B$5$s$$$o$/
: (B:
: > We may want to use _UID resource to wire unit number.
: > How about tweaking acpi_probe_child function so that attaching by
: > _UID order?
:
: That's probably not a bad idea. However, it may be somewhat tricky to
: implement. A quick hack solution would be to add the _UID to the order which
: works as long as _UIDs are all < 10. I think the general case of unit wiring
: is still useful though as it has applications outside of just ACPI.
I believe the right way to cope is adding the devices with the right
unit number. I think anything else is doomed to failure.
However, it will mean that we'll need to OMIT the sio hints for ISA
when we do acpi. We shouldn't be loading hints for isa anymore
anyway, except on really really old machines.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060709.002057.58455516.imp>