Re: PNP patch into kernel when?

Kenneth Albanowski (
Thu, 5 Dec 1996 10:13:18 -0500 (EST)

On Wed, 4 Dec 1996, Alan Cox wrote:

> > What exactly is the benefit of renaming request_region() and so on? As
> > far as I can see, this is just going to break an awful lot of perfectly
> > good code for no real purpose. Granted, the current names may not be
> > precisely the best, but there's nothing very wrong with them and I think
> I can see in the PnP world there are reasons for this to an extent. However
> the existing API should be kept even as macros to use the new API to allocate
> resources and mark them as fixed and immutable. I'll even grant thats
> slightly false for a few boards but its close to the truth.
> Mass changing the API isnt really acceptable.

You miss one point: Andrew's new resource management code is just that. It
isn't PnP specific, it is quite generic and subsumes all of the current
disparate mechanisms into a whole. Quite simply, it's a kernel
improvement. The fact that it is used by the PnP code is irrelevant. So
consider this a long overdue fix instead of a pointless modification.

Kenneth Albanowski (, CIS: 70705,126)