Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:11:22 +0200 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: "Thomas E. Zander" <riggs@rrr.de> Subject: Re: EHCI considered harmful? Message-ID: <200410291511.24063.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20041029080817.GB728@empiric.icir.org> References: <20041029075930.GG701@marvin.riggiland.au> <20041029080817.GB728@empiric.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1294103.B5FsbLZ2uI Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday, 29. October 2004 10:08, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 09:59:30AM +0200, Thomas E. Zander wrote: > > I'm just wondering why ehci doesn't make it into GENERIC for RELENG_5. > > Are there unresolved show stoppers related to it? > > ehci(4) is not stable code and fails reproducibly with my ALi-based > USB2 disk enclosure. Well, if we would take stability and general usefulness (even more so in=20 comparison to other USB implementations in mind) as the reference point, we= =20 would need to disable most of USB. I think enabling ehci in GENERIC would b= e=20 a good idea, especially since there's no loadable module... =2D-=20 ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org --nextPart1294103.B5FsbLZ2uI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.9.11 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBgkF8Xhc68WspdLARAmfmAJ9wl84wonTv+b7B4LPx/btLAoRL4QCdEx/d SDWUevy6gM1vlR7bjAmZ1Aw= =yO+t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1294103.B5FsbLZ2uI--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200410291511.24063.michaelnottebrock>