Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 17:37:08 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: Roger Hardiman <roger@cs.strath.ac.uk>, mobile@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PCIC_IRQ - disabling PCMCIA IRQ allocation Message-ID: <199810270037.RAA28919@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199810270025.AAA10745@woof.lan.awfulhak.org> References: <3634BA43.94BC672C@cs.strath.ac.uk> <199810270025.AAA10745@woof.lan.awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > One of the things PAO hase which the 3.0-RELEASE PCMCIA code does not > > have is the > > PCIC_IRQ kernel configuration. > > > > With it, it is possible to tell the PCMCIA card controller NOT to > > reserve itself an IRQ. > > This means no hot swapping of cards, but for my application (embedded > > systems) I cannot hot > > swap and I do not want an IRQ wasted by the card chipset. > > > > The patch for 3.0-RELEASE is trivial to include the PCIC_IRQ code > > (basically it forces a value in the > > pcic.c code). > > > > Is someone willing to commit this to -current if I supply the diff. > > > > It will then complete all my PCMCIA needs without needing the full PAO > > package. > > I'm willing to if > > 1. You can also specify the IRQ that the controller should use. > 2. Either Nate or Mike OKs it (I'll pass it to them for review first > - they're our resident laptop people). I'm out of the picture, but I'd like to see it done 'correctly'. Using OPTIONS is IMO the 'wrong' way of doing it. PAO already has about 3 dozen different options, and that's about 3 dozen too many when in fact each option is generally specific to one file. There's got to be a better way of configuring a single-file that is better than using options. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199810270037.RAA28919>