Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 14:41:37 +0900 From: Tomoaki NISHIYAMA <tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> To: y-nakaga@nwsl.mesh.ad.jp Cc: tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Subject: Re: Any success with CirrusLogic 6729/6730??? Message-ID: <19990412144137C.tomoaki@moss.nibb.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <199904120153.KAA08664@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp> References: <199904120153.KAA08664@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: NAKAGAWA Yoshihisa <y-nakaga@nwsl.mesh.ad.jp>
Subject: Re: Any success with CirrusLogic 6729/6730???
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 10:53:44 +0900
Message-ID: <199904120153.KAA08664@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp>
y-nakaga> > I don't. You do.
y-nakaga>
y-nakaga> You are miss-understanding.
Now, we are in agreement that an ISA PCIC is an ISA device
and that a PCI PCIC is a PCI device.
That is good enough and it's no use to discuss about
who is responsible for the misunderstanding.
We should go to the next major difference between new-bus and newconfig.
As far as I understand, new-bus strategy is to put all the information
of connection between bus and devices in individual device drivers,
while newconfig strategy is to put the information in a file outside
the kernel. Both are to put information of bus-device connection
outside the kernel. The difference is where to put it.
The reason why newconfig will put the information in a file
is to make the user-configuration easier.
The reason of new-bus to put the information in individual driver
is to make it easier to load the module dynamic.
Is this recognition right? I would like to hear from both sides.
--------
Tomoaki Nishiyama
e-mail:tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Department of Biological Sciences,
Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo
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?19990412144137C.tomoaki>