Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 16:50:29 -0700 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@scsiguy.com> To: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Inheritance in new-bus. Message-ID: <200101052350.f05NoTs42746@aslan.scsiguy.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Jan 2001 23:45:40 GMT." <3A565CA4.3466BF11@originative.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>"Justin T. Gibbs" wrote: >> > >> >> Cardbus is no different than your ethernet card example. Cardbus is >> not a child bus of PCI, but is rather a specialized implementation of > >Yes, cardbus is specialized PCI, that's why inheritance would be >correct. Ethernet is not anything like PCI though so inheritance would >be wrong. Hmm. I thought you were implying that your ethernet driver might need to overload some method of its parent bus in order to deal with a special quirk of that piece of hardware. In otherwords, you wouldn't be a specialized version of PCI, but perhaps have a few specialized methods of a particular interface provided by your parent bus. In general, I would not expect this to happen. >> >I don't know which particular take on inheritance you've implemented, I >> >wouldn't mind getting a look at the patches :-) >> >> Several of PCI's methods are now exported in pci_private.h. Cardbus's >> method table now references several of these methods and occassionally >> one or more of its method overrides also calls into the PCI code to get >> some amount of work done. > >Yeah, this is where inheritance would be useful. > And it is only the first example of many to come I think. -- Justin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200101052350.f05NoTs42746>