Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 18:15:25 -0700 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: hosokawa@itc.keio.ac.jp (HOSOKAWA Tatsumi) Cc: mike@smith.net.au, imp@village.org, nate@mt.sri.com, mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: usr.sbin/pccard/pccardd change for "cardio" and "cardmem" Message-ID: <199907220115.SAA03148@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 22 Jul 1999 10:13:06 %2B0900." <199907220113.KAA11511@afs.ntc.mita.keio.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> I think "cardio" is a bad > >> name for the keyword too; I would use the same keyword that's used for > >> specifying a fixed I/O address but use a notation signifying an > >> arbitrary multiple, eg. > >> > >> ioport %8 > > I also agree with it. This seems better than "cardio". Explicit I/O > location is only needed for hardwired driver code. > > I'll rewrite my patch soon. > > By the way, to be "arbitrary multiple" is not important in resource > allocation for PC-cards. The size of I/O window is essential. Ah, I misunderstood. I presume that this is an override for CIS' that don't specify the correct window size? In that case, I would use 'iosize' as the keyword, since we have historically used that to denote the I/O window size for ISA devices. However, perhaps it makes more sense to have a more complete syntax for supplying CIS overrides? Perhaps something as simple as cis xx,xx,xx,xx,xx,xx,xx,xx to specify a new tuple, or cis iosize 8 to override any existing CIS I/O window size? I guess it depends a lot on how many of these overrides are likely to be needed. -- \\ The mind's the standard \\ Mike Smith \\ of the man. \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ -- Joseph Merrick \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199907220115.SAA03148>