John Baldwin wrote: > On Tuesday 12 July 2005 04:12 pm, Harry Coin wrote: > >>John, >> >>I am sincerely appreciative the time you have taken. Your test results >>are below. >> >>I haven't processed everything you've written, but I'm not going to hold >>you up waiting as that is going to take a while. >> >>The code just comments out the line you mentioned. pcm0 loads with ACPI on >>in this case. I haven't tested what happens with ACPI off, and have no >>easy way to test what will happen with the other non-pnp chips (or other >>pnp chips) this driver supports. > > > Ok, thanks. > > >>I suggest you send a copy of your comments to whoever fixes up the >>architecture manual, because of evident disagreement regarding best >>practice in the isa non-pnp driver detection method (ISA_PNP_PROBE vs. >>isa_get_logical_id). > > > Well, I think I've just figured out why it says that (the ACPIxxxx devices), > so it looks like I am going to have to go through and fix all the various > drivers to use a probe routine if they attach to ACPI. It looks like several > drivers attach to acpi that probably don't need to as well (ACPI only > enumerates built-in hardware like COM ports, etc. It doesn't enumerate ISA > PnP cards). Thanks for looking into this. I agree that only the PNP-capable probe should attach to acpi. -- NateReceived on Fri Jul 15 2005 - 19:39:40 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:38 UTC