Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 00:26:12 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Slight suggested change to PCI config stuff. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905080025000.18703-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990507160746.14285H-100000@current1.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 7 May 1999, Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Fri, 7 May 1999, Mike Smith wrote: > > Sounds good. You'd do it totally differently in 4.x (use a "generic > > match" priority driver for the catchall bridge code and a "device > > match" priority for the chipset-aware drivers). > > and > > On Fri, 7 May 1999, Doug Rabson wrote: > > > > This makes sense for 3.x. Everything is different for 4.x though post > > new-bus. The right thing in 4.x is to use priority ordered probes (which I > > have working but haven't committed). If a driver matches the generic class > > it would return a lower priority than a driver which matches the device > > exactly. > > ok here is a patch for 3.x > > it's excedingly simple, and allows a specific driver to have precedence > over the builtin generic entries.. > > I'd like to sneak this in asap if possible.. > I think it can be proven to be benign. > > any seconders? It looks like it would work. A bit ugly but I don't mind since we have the possibility of the 'right' solution in -current. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9905080025000.18703-100000>