From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 5 21:24:58 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B000716A430 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:24:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from speedfactory.net (mail6.speedfactory.net [66.23.216.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6DC43DA6 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 21:24:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (unverified [66.23.211.162]) by speedfactory.net (SurgeMail 3.5b3) with ESMTP id 3208977 for multiple; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 16:21:58 -0500 Received: from localhost (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jB5LNZPx041669; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 16:23:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Joe Rhett Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 15:26:47 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20051117050336.GB67653@svcolo.com> <200512011153.50287.jhb@freebsd.org> <20051205200709.GC13194@svcolo.com> In-Reply-To: <20051205200709.GC13194@svcolo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200512051526.48117.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on server.baldwin.cx X-Server: High Performance Mail Server - http://surgemail.com r=1653887525 Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: com1 incorrectly associated with ttyd1, com2 with ttyd0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 21:24:59 -0000 On Monday 05 December 2005 03:07 pm, Joe Rhett wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:53:49AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > No, it is reading it right. When you disable a device in ACPI it merely > > doesn't assign resources to it. The OS can assign resources to it on its > > own though and re-enable the device. FreeBSD currently doesn't implement > > enough to get that right though. > > So what's involved in simply having it say > Found : disabled in BIOS > > instead of half a dozen complaints for each disabled device? There's no disabled flag. If you have PNP OS set to yes in your BIOS, it is free to leave any devices not needed for booting unconfigured (like printer ports, serial ports, etc.) and there is no way for the OS to know if the BIOS didn't alloc resources because it is disabled or because the BIOS was just lazy. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org