Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 13:02:43 +0930 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patches from -current for -stable I'd like to commit after testing Message-ID: <199710240332.NAA00908@word.smith.net.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 23 Oct 1997 18:06:01 MST." <19971023180601.65534@hydrogen.nike.efn.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> ahh.. thanks for telling me this.. right now I'm looking at designing
> a new bus/device interaction spec... and stuff like this is what I want
> to know about.. :) with your addition I realized that having "fixed"
> entries for probe/attach'ing is really stupid.. and that we should
> actually go on an event based system where an even is delievered to the
> device driver...
This is pretty hot.
> right now it's something like:
> enum { DV_PROBE,
> DV_ATTACH,
> DV_DETACH,
> DV_SUSPEND,
> DV_RESUME
> };
DV_LOAD, DV_UNLOAD at least as well. (LOAD would be the first call
made after the driver was linked in, UNLOAD would have to agree to
being unloaded and invalidate all references to the driver.)
> int (*handler)(strcut device *dev, int event);
There's no support there for passing in more event information; the
probe would want to take a number of parameters varying on the bus
support making the probe. eg. the PCI code would want to pass in PCI
ID numbers and preset resource information. Likewise the PnP code
would have information derived from the PnP data, and a vanilla ISA
probe would have data derived from a static configuration.
mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710240332.NAA00908>