From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 30 20:36:13 2004 Return-Path: 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 C0A3116A4CE for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:36:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B0CDD43D5E for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:36:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 1928 invoked by uid 65534); 30 Oct 2004 20:36:11 -0000 Received: from pD95D821A.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO lofi.dyndns.org) (217.93.130.26) by mail.gmx.net (mp011) with SMTP; 30 Oct 2004 22:36:11 +0200 X-Authenticated: #443188 Received: from kiste.my.domain (lofi@kiste.my.domain [192.168.8.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by lofi.dyndns.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9UKZsCg001841 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:36:02 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net) From: Michael Nottebrock To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:35:51 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20041029075930.GG701@marvin.riggiland.au> <200410291511.24063.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <02ed01c4beb7$4b45ba50$6400000a@venti> In-Reply-To: <02ed01c4beb7$4b45ba50$6400000a@venti> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-UID: 42 X-Length: 2633 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200410302235.52246.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new cc: "Brian K. White" Subject: Re: EHCI considered harmful? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:36:13 -0000 On Saturday, 30. October 2004 21:32, Brian K. White wrote: > > On Friday, 29. October 2004 10:08, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 09:59:30AM +0200, Thomas E. Zander wrote: > > > > I'm just wondering why ehci doesn't make it into GENERIC for > > > > RELENG_5. Are there unresolved show stoppers related to it? > > > > > > ehci(4) is not stable code and fails reproducibly with my ALi-based > > > USB2 disk enclosure. > > > > Well, if we would take stability and general usefulness (even more so in > > comparison to other USB implementations in mind) as the reference point, > > we > > would need to disable most of USB. I think enabling ehci in GENERIC would > > be > > a good idea, especially since there's no loadable module... > > I think that since it can't be unloaded and can crash or lock up a box > before the kernel even finishes booting, that this idea is absolutely > backwards. Every device driver has the potential to do that, some are reportedly doing it for some users (in particular those parts of usb which _are_ in GENERIC). It's always annoying when that happens, but that doesn't change reality: USB 2.0 hardware is not exactly on the way out, very much on the contrary. Thus ehci support must find its way into GENERIC, and if it's buggy, it needs to be fixed. Maybe I should clarify that I'm talking -CURRENT here. Of course we shouldn't put code with known serious bugs into -STABLE (although OTOH USB 1.1 support managed to sneak in there, too ... 8-) ). -- ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org