From owner-freebsd-current Tue Sep 4 16:10:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from ns.koganei.wide.ad.jp (koganei.wide.ad.jp [202.249.37.254]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0380937B403 for ; Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:10:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from koganei.wide.ad.jp (koganei.wide.ad.jp [202.249.37.254]) by ns.koganei.wide.ad.jp (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f84NApI32824; Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:10:51 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from ikob@koganei.wide.ad.jp) Message-ID: <3B955FD9.83F67031@koganei.wide.ad.jp> Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 08:12:26 +0900 From: Katsushi Kobayashi Reply-To: ikob@koganei.wide.ad.jp X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer Cc: NAKAMURA Kazushi , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Firewire driver available References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Yes, we talk about two implementations. Also both implementations are written by me. The former one is designed for socket basis API for firewire. I have once proposed with the former version. Unfortunately, FreeBSD folks did not accept it. The socket mechanism was pnly one reason, in that time. However, noone supported this version, and also I have no intention to use socket I/F for firewire.So, I offered with the updated version. Anyway, I cannot find any advantage to merge it. If FreeBSD folks support the former version, someone will maintain it. BTW, my USENIX paper based on the former one, and I can write an updated paper, if necessary. Julian Elischer wrote: > For thiose of us that are not firewire experts > can you guys tell us: > > Are we talking about two completely different firewire implementations > here? > Or ar they based on each other? Are there any major incompatibilities > in the designs? > It's time to import firewire so I'd like to get one or the other (or > even better, a merged version if there are things each does not do) > into the tree soon. > > Can you clear the situation? > > I have the USENIX paper here (I actually attended) and am reading it now. > > Julian > > On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Katsushi Kobayashi wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I have to notice you that the latest version driver I offered at yesterday > > does not have any compatibolity with the base-code of your patch. > > Also, I have once offered FreeBSD folks with the former version > > at monthes ago. But, they did not accept that one. > > > > Anyway, I can add the new chipset to the liist of supporting chipset, > > if we get volunteer. > > > > > > NAKAMURA Kazushi wrote: > > > > > In article <3B93DC65.249BF99E@elischer.org> > > > julian@elischer.org writes: > > > >Is there any chance that the OHCI code inthe firewire driver and the OHCI > > > >code in the USB drivers might be rationalised? > > > > > > There is a IEEE1394 patch for 4.4RC1. It works on my N/B IEEE1394 4-port I/F, > > > that uses VIA VT6306 chip. I bought it 2980 yen(about $25) in KOBE. > > > Please port this patch to 5-current. > > > > > > http://kobe1995.net/~kaz/FreeBSD/IEEE1394.html > > > > > > Enjoy IEEE1394! > > > -- > > > NAKAMURA Kazushi@KOBE > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message