RE: PnP model

From: Grover, Andrew (andrew.grover@intel.com)
Date: Tue Feb 04 2003 - 14:53:40 EST


> From: John Bradford [mailto:john@grabjohn.com]
> > I think the people who want to manually configure their device's
> > resources need to step up and justify why this is really necessary.
>
> Prototyping an embedded system, maybe, where you have devices in the
> test box that won't be in the production machine. You would want them
> to use resources other than those that you want the hardware which
> will be present to use.

Ok fair enough. But I think the drivers should always think things are
handled in a PnP manner, even if they really aren't. ;-) For example,
between the stages where PnP enumerates the devices and the stage where
drivers get device_add notifications as a result of that, we will be
assigning the system resources to each device, but we could also
implement a way at this stage for people to manually alter things. I
think this is the right place to do this, as opposed to having all the
drivers implement code to probe for themselves.

Thoughts?

Regards -- Andy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:15 EST