From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 15 16:24:47 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBD71065675 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:24:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779348FC0A for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:24:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.30.101.53] ([209.117.142.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6FGKMZB030394 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:23 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:11 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201106242342.47194.hselasky@c2i.net> <201106251907.02052.hselasky@c2i.net> <201106260738.21847.hselasky@c2i.net> <3FC50F07-2C7B-4DD4-A75C-49001CFEF85D@bsdimp.com> To: Robert Millan X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (harmony.bsdimp.com [10.0.0.6]); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:20:24 -0600 (MDT) Cc: Jeremy Messenger , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Hans Petter Selasky Subject: Re: Automatic load of PCI kernel modules [WAS: [RFT] Automatic load of USB kernel modules] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 16:24:47 -0000 On Jul 15, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Robert Millan wrote: > 2011/6/26 Warner Losh : >> I like the idea of having a standardized table. I've done this with = PC Card and it really works well. It isn't the design pattern that all = drivers use, and it may be hard to get everyone lined up on this. I = tried PCI back after I did PC Card and met resistance. Most of the = resistance was from people that are no longer active in the project, so = I think that we could do this today. I suspect that some of the vendor = drivers today might stand in the way of having PCI be completely = uniform. >>=20 >> The big advantage of USB is that it is uniform now. PCI isn't. It = would take a lot of work to make it uniform. >=20 > If only some PCI drivers can be made uniform, why not provide devd > autoload support only to those drivers whose maintainers choose to > make them uniform? This would give those opposing uniformity a > compelling reason to change their view, without forcing them into it. Sure. The problem is that I don't want it to be another hack like the = current USB which is specific to PCI. Warner