From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Aug 30 16:47:25 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 744F916A4CE; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:47:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [168.103.84.182])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 158CE43D45; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:47:25 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7UGlHcn052963;
	Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:47:17 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:47:23 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20040830.104723.66164724.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: nate@root.org
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <41335688.1060805@root.org>
References: <412D1CE6.3050603@root.org>
	<20040825.171523.10602123.imp@bsdimp.com>
	<41335688.1060805@root.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: phk@phk.freebsd.dk
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: No more floppy drive
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:47:25 -0000

In message: <41335688.1060805@root.org>
            Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> writes:
: Basically, systems that have AML that claim 0x3f2-0x3f5,0x3f7 are 
: correct and we need to only allocate those ports.  In fact, we shouldn't 
: allocate 0x3f0-0x3f1 unless on a PS/2 system.  However, our floppy code 
: assumes a base of 0x3f0 and that's why people report error messages like:

Yes.  That's right.  I've understood that from early in the
conversations.  However, we don't have much of a choice for systems
that tell us 0x3f0-0x3f5, which is what the traditional range for
these ports really is.  This is a very recent development, and needs
some tcl to get right.  I have some patches in the works, but they
aren't ready yet.  Please be patient.

Warner