Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 09:12:25 -0700 From: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> To: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.0 - Isa devices not being probed Message-ID: <200005301612.JAA01179@mass.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 30 May 2000 12:01:12 EDT." <200005301601.MAA26766@etinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >> >A good bus abstraction lets you care as much or as little as necessary. > >> >The NetBSD framework (which we use) allows you to do this. > >> > >> The best "portable" coding method is with memory-mapped registers, which > >> seems to have been omitted from this "implementation", which is the gripe > >> here. > > > >It "seems" that you haven't "read" any of the "documentation" or the > >"code" either. > > No one has indicated that there is any docs on it, only that they are "in > the works", which is promising but not terribly useful. The comments in the > source dont qualify as documention. You've been pointed to the extensive manpage collection several times now. On top of this, there are a stack of drivers available for reference purposes. > >> Perhaps "portable" within the OS was your goal, but in the mean time > >> "portable" between very different OSs has been tainted. > > > >If you mean "FreeBSD should be Linux-driver-compatible", then your bus is > >leaving and you should be warming a seat. > > No, it means that it the ability to port from one OS to another is a win > for both camps and that it should be a consideration. This is still pretty straightforward, actually. Your problem is that you're looking at an API with *more* functionality, and you need to incorporate the superset. You'll typically find that everything your Linux driver does can be handled with a wrapper that's also busspace compatible. > >> One of the problems with "free software" is that the big picture is missed > >> because the people writing OS's dont care (and for the most part dont > >> understand) about vendors supporting multiple, very different, OS's. > > > >One of the problems these vendors face is that "free software" OS > >developers are less interested in pursuing the lowest common denominator. > > Which is why linux is running away with the market, because its too > difficult to support several free OSs so you just support the largest market. This suggests that we should just become "Linux". No thanks. > >If you think that "memory mapped registers" are platform-portable, all I > >can suggest is that you try playing with a few different platforms, and > >preferably some time when you're prepared for a nasty shock. > > I said OS portable, not platform portable. The original purpose of Freebsd > was to be an intel specific optimization of BSD. Clearly that is no longer > the case. So glad you noticed. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com 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?200005301612.JAA01179>