Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 21:27:44 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: jhb@FreeBSD.org Cc: new-bus@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bus_generic_probe() is wrong I think Message-ID: <20020830.212744.52905008.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020830225952.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <20020830.203228.35798916.imp@bsdimp.com> <XFMail.20020830225952.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <XFMail.20020830225952.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
: Pretty much what I was saying. I have an atsys(4) driver btw that apm
: and nexus_pcib are now descendants of and only gets attached if the
: acpi identify fails in the jhb_acpipci p4 branch.
hmmmm, I like this. maybe a pc98sys(4) driver might also not be a bad
idea. I'm not sure how pc98's nexus is related to i386's, but I know
that there's a lot of intertwingling there that aren't immeidately
apparent :-(. Looking at the files.pc98 list, it appears that it uses
the i386 nexus.
Of course at this point apm(98) and the pci host bridge stuff likely
is the same between the two ports. So maybe atsys isn't quite the
right name. This is one thing that's common between the two ports,
even though a lot of the details of each of these beasts differ.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-new-bus" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020830.212744.52905008.imp>