Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: CML2 design philosophy heads-up | Date | Fri, 18 May 2001 16:38:08 +0100 (BST) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> 1. When we have a platform symbol for a reference design like MVME147, do > we stick to its spec sheet or consider it representative of all derivatives > (which may have other facilities)?
At most it bounds the busses directly available. I've yet to see VME cardbus adapters but its quite possible.
> I don't want to do (a); it conflicts with my design objective of > simplifying configuration enough that Aunt Tillie can do it. I won't > do that unless I see a strong consensus that it's the only Right Thing.
Its a good way of getting the defaults right. It may also be an appropriate way of guiding presentation (eg putting the stuff the ruleset says you wont have under a subcategory so you would see
CPU type Devices blah blah Other Options IDE disk Cardbus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |