Re: PNP patch into kernel when?

Ingo Molnar (
Tue, 3 Dec 1996 19:20:44 +0100 (MET)

On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Philip Blundell wrote:

> I'm not sure either that the new name _will_ save any thinking time (is
> "interrupt" really any less obvious than "irq"?) [..]

ok, but you were complaining about request_region().

the PNP patch renames request_region because it introduces new concepts of
hardware-resource management. All request_ functions are piped to a
central 'request_hw_region()' function, with the appropriate flag. The
'IO-region' is just a special flag. If we use the PNP patch, it would be
very misleading to have 'request_region'. Why should 'request_region'
be special?

[dont misunderstand me: wether these new concepts are correct is not up to

I will be asked by my grandchildren in quite some years, and i can only
answer 'in those old 2.1 days when the PNP patch came into the kernel,
there we had an old function called request_region()'. And they will think
'hey what an old idiot', and they will be right :)

-- Ingo 'huh, hope this wasnt a flame :)' Molnar