Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 09:53:48 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: NAKAGAWA Yoshihisa <y-nakaga@nwsl.mesh.ad.jp>, Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Nathan Dorfman <nathan@rtfm.net>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PAO Integration? Message-ID: <199812101653.JAA22925@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <29660.913281032@zippy.cdrom.com> References: <199812100653.PAA02808@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp> <29660.913281032@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I disagree 3.0-RELEASE style. ISA device, shuld be attach as ISA > > device. PCI PCIC, like CardBus controller, shuld be attach as PCI > > device. It should be separate PCIC core code from bus depend and > > bus independ. > > FWIW, I think Yoshihisa-san is quite correct here. There's nothing > keeping one from writing a separate bus attach function for each > ISA/PCI/etc PCIC just as we do for many of our "ISA" drivers which > have since evolved into PCI market models. The problem is that making it into an ISA device precludes us from doing alot of the 'IRQ' mapping, since that code is now wrapped up into the (once ISA independant) code. We (the FreeBSD laptop weenies) have been down this road in discussions before, and have rejected it as a hack. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199812101653.JAA22925>