Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:37:04 -0400
From:      "John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell" <johnandsara2@cox.net>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Emeric POUPON <emeric.poupon@arkoon-netasq.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: How to properly handle several fonctions provided by the Winbond SuperIO chip?
Message-ID:  <53BF23A0.1000603@cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <HrsE1o01s2X408g01rsFrH>
References:  <1118241087.138096.1403180509132.JavaMail.zimbra@arkoon-netasq.com> <201406190919.04443.jhb@freebsd.org> <750618593.166408.1403191319583.JavaMail.zimbra@arkoon-netasq.com> <HrsE1o01s2X408g01rsFrH>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:21:59 am Emeric POUPON wrote:
>> Thanks for your answer!
>>
>> I was thinking about calling some parent device functions from the children 
> devices in order to perform IO accesses.
>> But I imagine it would be "better" to expose a kind of bus interface from 
> the main driver?
>> However, I'm not sure the extra work induced is worth it. What do you think?
> 
> I think it's fine to have them call each other directly if they are going to 
> all live in the same module.
> 

just wondering

do you mean fine not to expose a feature ?

or fine the Winbond chip circuit allows the procedure with no problems ?

wow i thought winbond io would have been a done deal.  wasn't that 
released in 1990s ?  (rhetorical)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53BF23A0.1000603>