From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 20:15:03 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F0B16A41F for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:15:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from speedfactory.net (mail6.speedfactory.net [66.23.216.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBC4D43D55 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:15:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (unverified [66.23.211.162]) by speedfactory.net (SurgeMail 3.5b3) with ESMTP id 3960717 for multiple; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 15:12:53 -0500 Received: from localhost (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jBGKElK0081886; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 15:14:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Joe Rhett Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 15:15:15 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20051117050336.GB67653@svcolo.com> <200512051526.48117.jhb@freebsd.org> <20051216064300.GC49191@svcolo.com> In-Reply-To: <20051216064300.GC49191@svcolo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200512161515.16327.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1210/Thu Dec 15 10:23:22 2005 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on server.baldwin.cx X-Server: High Performance Mail Server - http://surgemail.com r=1653887525 Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: com1 incorrectly associated with ttyd1, com2 with ttyd0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:15:04 -0000 On Friday 16 December 2005 01:43 am, Joe Rhett wrote: > > On Monday 05 December 2005 03:07 pm, Joe Rhett wrote: > > > So what's involved in simply having it say > > > Found : disabled in BIOS > > > instead of half a dozen complaints for each disabled device? > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 03:26:47PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > There's no disabled flag. If you have PNP OS set to yes in your BIOS, it > > is free to leave any devices not needed for booting unconfigured (like > > printer ports, serial ports, etc.) and there is no way for the OS to know > > if the BIOS didn't alloc resources because it is disabled or because the > > BIOS was just lazy. > > If this is impossible to know, why do Windows and Linux both handle it > properly? Probably because currently most BIOSen still setup most ISA-type devices even though they aren't required to when PnP OS is set to YES and Windows and linux are probably just as lazy as we are when it comes to ISA-type devices that have no resources (i.e. just fail to attach instead of trying to figure out which resources to use and setting it up.) Really there should be an OS-dependent way of saying that you don't want to use a device and you could even turn devices off that the BIOS enables. We don't have and good way for handling that currently however. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org