Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 09:46:26 +1000 (EST) From: David Dawes <dawes@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> To: davidg@root.com Cc: SimsS@Infi.Net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC Message-ID: <199607102346.JAA11542@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199607101420.HAA03974@root.com> from "David Greenman" at Jul 10, 96 07:20:52 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>(For my benefit, can anyone explain why the default port address for ed0 >>>is 0x280? I assume some historical reason, but I really don't know the >>>details....) >> >>It is a common default for WD/SMC cards, which also use the ed driver. > > So is 0x300. There's even a hard jumper to select it, and I think the >WD/SMC cards are even set to 0x300 out of the box. > >>>OK, how 'bout this: I'll endorse nuking the ed1 device, but only if the >>>default settings for the ed0 device are changed to 5/300 in GENERIC. What >>>say? >> >>No! > > Erm, why? 0x300 is a better default. Well, a lot of the old WD cards I have are set initially to 0x280 (admitedly these are quite old cards, and are set by jumper only). I presumed this was a reason why ed0 used that port, but perhaps cards like this are in the minority now. I wonder if the change will cause hassles for people who may have jumpered their cards to the 5/280 setting to suit ed0 on previous releases. Anyway, for me, booting with -c is no big deal, and I always build a custom kernel after installing. It may be simpler to leave ed0 and ed1 in place, unless either is causing a conflict elsewhere. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607102346.JAA11542>