Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 10:13:16 +0000 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: User asks: can we decouple device vendor IDs from drivers? Message-ID: <200311011013.hA1ADH4L032554@grimreaper.grondar.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:57:53 MST." <20031031.125753.124085663.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"M. Warner Losh" writes: > The problem with decoupling things entirely from the drivers is that > many drivers will say "if I have this revision of that card, do this > workaround." or "if I'm this or newer, I have this feature" both of > which are broken by the kernel forcing the driver to service a given > hunk of hardware. Hmm. Careful design may sort this out, methinks. If the file (which sounds analagous to /boot/device.hints to me) turned devid's into generic griver requrements (DEVID(0x04589045) == driver(foo) revision(bar) flags(baz, qux)) would that not be usable? (/me wonders if he has the time to do this - he's certainly interested) > The other down side is that when you bork the alias > file on solaris, you are so hozed. ... like most of the files in /boot/... > However, it would make the dynamic loading of drivers easier. I really like to concept of configuring things with vi(1), instead of with gcc :-) M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200311011013.hA1ADH4L032554>