Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 22:30:17 -0400 From: Gary Corcoran <garycorc@mail.idt.net> To: Sujal Patel <smpatel@umiacs.umd.edu> Cc: janus@freegate.net, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Plug and Play naivety Message-ID: <32435339.15C2@mail.idt.net> References: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960920162611.31553F-100000@mickey.umiacs.umd.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sujal Patel wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Sep 1996, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > This exchange implies that the kernel will not use the PnP information > > in the presence of a PnP BIOS to configure the drivers. Can you confirm > > or deny this? > > > > The benefit of the PnP code is not simply configuration of devices in > > the absence of a PnP BIOS, but also in the provision of hints to the > > device drivers. > > The Plug & Play driver will eventually fill in isa_device structures for > ISA devices properly. If you chose not to configure your PnP device, it > will read the configuration that is already there (i.e. the BIOS setup > configuration). > > You could further extend the model, by allowing the kernel to choose a > device driver based on the information presented by the PnP aspect of the > card (this is not planned for the first release). > Is the (eventual) plan for the PnP code to allow kernel-config-specified values to override those programmed by a PnP BIOS? This would be desirable to allow for fixing things when the BIOS botches its automatic assignments (and/or I just want to specify, for example, my own priorities for IRQs). Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?32435339.15C2>