Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>