Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:17:01 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: harrycoin@qconline.com Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, nate@root.org Subject: Re: mss.c pcm fix to ' attach returned 6 ' load failure for v5.x acpi and up Message-ID: <20050716.131701.124866666.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20050716.125824.48530425.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20050716.113059.82101301.imp@bsdimp.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20050716124022.01f08460@mail.qconline.com> <20050716.125824.48530425.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<the refs are wrong for this reply> Nate writes: > I really think the driver is broken and the API is fine for this. I > don't like the hack of returning a random CID for checks against the > HID. Drivers down the road may come to rely on this and then every BIOS > that has a different order for CIDs becomes a potential breakage point. They alredy do rely on this. When they support pnp, they call the ISA_PNP_PROBE routine. When they don't then your observation doesn't matter because the order of the IDs doesn't matter: their non-zeroness does. > Drivers should not rely on isa_get_logicalid() to determine a boolean > "is PNP?" Actually, that's the interface. We have to follow it, even if you think it is stupid. It is how we do things. When we don't have a logicalid, we return 0. When drivers don't support pnp devices, it uses the existance of a non-zero pnpid to know the device isn't for them. It has been this way since 3.0. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050716.131701.124866666.imp>