Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:02:19 +0200 From: "Joachim Isaksson" <Joachim.Isaksson@ibfs.com> To: "Warner Losh" <imp@harmony.village.org> Cc: <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Generic PnP? (Was: Re: IrDA? PnP?) Message-ID: <00ae01be8ce1$e2f686d0$8cbc2dc1@ibfs.com> References: <000a01be842b$eeff6e10$f56d17c2@home.ibfs.com> <199904120434.WAA03416@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> : 4) As I (so far) understand it, the PnP functionality is a special "hack" > : for the ISA bus right now and could not easily be extended to integrate PnP > : devices on the IrDA bus? Is this assumption correct? If so, is anyone > > Yes. PnP is too generic a term to have generic code. PCI pnp and > parallel port PnP are both radically different than isa pnp or serial > port pnp. Well, in the kernel I agree that it would be hard to use generic code, but does it have to be as tough as it is now for userland to do something intelligent, really? For example, if the PCI, ISA, USB and sio drivers know how to plug and play devices connected to "their bus" and export collected info through a common device (for example /dev/pnp0), a userland process would easily load and unload kernel modules as needed without knowing the bus PnP specifics. This model would rather easily integrate IrDA PnP too. I can't see that this would be very hard to implement, but then I'm not a kernel guru (yet :-) /Joachim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00ae01be8ce1$e2f686d0$8cbc2dc1>