Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:27:06 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcelm@juniper.net> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: embedded@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ocpbus(4) Message-ID: <595F307F-8FC5-48D5-A69C-84660A768F23@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <20071228.125020.-1962668065.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <B56F8F3C-7872-47B9-8154-1C08F5BEEA3D@juniper.net> <20071228.114559.-311937481.imp@bsdimp.com> <B5E9CBD1-0F16-422C-9AFA-CC33D988630C@juniper.net> <20071228.125020.-1962668065.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 28, 2007, at 11:50 AM, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : Existing drivers that only check DEVTYPE (which I'm sure > : we'll start with) will have to check DEVCLASS as well if > : there's going to be variation within DEVTYPE. > > Are there existing drivers right now? The e500 port uses ocpbus(4) and if we make it generic, I can merge it into CVS independently of the e500 code itself. > FreeBSD has two models for device enumeration. One is where the > parent bus decides, by whatever means, and one where the device itself > has enough information to allow the driver to decide. I think that > trying to shoe-horn the second model into a situation where the first > model is actually better would be a disservice. When would the first be better? -- Marcel Moolenaar marcelm@juniper.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?595F307F-8FC5-48D5-A69C-84660A768F23>