Yes. MS created the PnP standard, but the PnP standard is much more than
just the hardware.
Also, a _lot_ of the PnP standard is not really anything conceptually
"PnP" at all - a lot of it can be considered to be just part of any normal
driver. The 3c509 driver has been "PnP aware" for a long time (to the
degree that it sometimes has problems finding one of the older 3c509 cards
that don't support PnP), but nobody ever claimed that it needed "PnP
support from the kernel".
THAT is one of my main arguments against PnP. MicroSoft made it into this
semi-cohesive thing that is a complex rats nest, and you can often look at
the whole problem from a totally different standpoint. The whole term
"PnP" is just fraught with all these marketing issues that have zero,
zilch, nada, no technical merit at all.
We'll support PnP hardware, but not by trying to implement some rickety
PnP framework. We already do a lot of what PnP does - allocating IO ports
and keeping the reservation information alive. We may need minor tweaks to
that.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu