Re: No more floppy drive

On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 04:28:07PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote:
> M. Warner Losh wrote:
> >In message: <412D12D4.1000401_at_root.org>
> >            Nate Lawson <nate_at_root.org> writes:
> >: There are only two ways currently to find fd0 on ISA systems: ACPI _FDE 
> >: probing and hints.  The acpi probe automatically falls back to the hints 
> >: system if _FDE fails so you should leave the hint.fd.0 lines in but 
> >: comment out hint.fdc lines (as you've done).
> >
> >I think this is a bad idea, but may be what we have to do for 5.3.  We
> >can find out what drives are on the system by asking the rtc() if
> >there's no _FDE, which is what the old, pre-acpi code did (which is
> >why people are seeing their drives disappear now).
> 
> This is incorrect.  The acpi commits did not remove any rtc probe; there 
> never was one.  There were only two commits by me to fdc.c so check them 
> out to see what I mean.  All I did was move the existing hints probe 
> into its own function, fdc_hints_probe().  The easiest way to see how 
> fdX gets probed is to look for callers to fdc_add_child().  They are 
> fdc_acpi_probe_children() and fdc_hints_probe().  The latter is called 
> by the ISA attachment or the ACPI attachment if the _FDE method is not 
> present.  (BTW, it seems the pccard attachment doesn't probe this way?)
> 
It doesn't look like an ACPI problem to me, since I don't use an ACPI
(due to it assigning an incorrect IRQ to my NIC).  If I try with ACPI,
I don't see any change in behavior.  (Thought I'd mention this again.)


Cheers,
-- 
Ruslan Ermilov
ru_at_FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD committer