Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 08 May 1998 23:44:07 -0700
From:      Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
To:        Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
Cc:        Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ISA-PnP w\o BIOS support? 
Message-ID:  <199805090644.XAA00836@antipodes.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 May 1998 21:15:40 MDT." <199805080315.VAA12411@mt.sri.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

(Sorry, I took a day to do some more interesting things.)

> > > Current situation:
> > > controller      wdc0    at isa? port "IO_WD1" bio irq 14 vector wdintr
> > > 
> > > What I'd like to be able to do:
> > > controller	card0	at generic flags 0x1 irq ?
> > > 
> > > The 'at generic' stuff is open to discussion, but I need a way of saying
> > > 'I *WANT* that IRQ, and you can't have it!"
> > 
> > What you've just said is "I want to tell the driver to find its own 
> > IRQ".  I don't think this is what you meant.
> 
> No, what I said is what I want.  IF you have a non-ISA device, you can't
> tell FreeBSD that it has this IRQ.

Duh.  Like I don't know this?  But you contradicted yourself when you 
said "I want to be able to say ... irq ?" where this is supposed to 
assign a given IRQ to the device.

> > > Also, I'd like to see:
> > > controller	irqsink0	at generic irq 11
> > > controller	irqsink1	at generic irq 13
> > > 
> > > For hardware that doesn't have any driver in FreeBSD so I can say
> > > "*DON'T* use this IRQ, it's in use."
> > 
> > Why create a (totally bogus) driver?
> 
> Because FreeBSD doesn't (and won't) support all of the available
> hardware.  I'm trying to moving FreeBSD towards a more 'dynamic' system,
> and I'm being fought the entire way.

You have got to be kidding.  Compile-time constants are not "dynamic" 
in any sense of the word.

I'm not opposing you, on the contrary it's you opposing my suggestions.
This whole discussion started when I suggested that it would be sensible
to make use of the available resource-related information in order to
require less static configuration information in the majority case.

> > > Excpecting the users to know/understand each and every tweakable know is
> > > ludicrous.  By making the knob/hooks settable in the config file
> > > (something they already know how to deal with, or will know how to deal
> > > with) means it's *really* obvious which device they are messing with, so
> > > the learning curve is much less.
> > 
> > This is (IMO) bogus.  Stuff set in the kernel configuration file is no 
> > easier to manipulate than sysctl variables.
> 
> Sure it is.  I know how things are setup in the kernel config files. I

Ah, so "easier" means "easier for me".  I think you'll find that most 
people consider an interactive configuration process a lot "easier" 
than having to install and build the kernel sources.  If you're really 
concerned about this issue, there are better directions you could be 
channeling your effort in.

> > You're more than welcome to veneer over the fact that the startup 
> > tunables are sysctl variables; sysctl is a parameter access method, not 
> > a user interface as you appear to have mistaken it for.
> 
> Doing something different just because you think it's a good ida doesn't
> make it a good idea.  Duplicating functionality that already exists is
> adding 'Yet Another Thing to learn', when it's booth un-necessary and
> provices no additional functionality.

My point exactly.  Sysctl exists.  It works.  Don't duplicate something 
it does perfectly well because you don't like it.

Again; sysctl is an access method, not a user interface.  If you don't 
like the user interface, try griping about that instead.

> At least with things like M$ registery settings, the average user is
> never subjected to messing with it, but in our sysystem we invent new
> ways to confuse the user and require him to have an even steeper
> learning curve, because everyday we come up with something 'new' and
> better than what we did, which is neither new nor better, just
> different.

Decaf, Nate.  Decaf.

-- 
\\  Sometimes you're ahead,       \\  Mike Smith
\\  sometimes you're behind.      \\  mike@smith.net.au
\\  The race is long, and in the  \\  msmith@freebsd.org
\\  end it's only with yourself.  \\  msmith@cdrom.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199805090644.XAA00836>