![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
[Please CC me replies as I'm not on the list ] Hi When I added kt400 agp support recently (just a ID declaration since generic via routines work fine on my box), I had to declare the KT400 pci id in gart. Which was the only thing really needed (or so I thought in a sane world). Then I did the 2.4 patch. And guess what ? I found I had to declare it in dri (two times, ie for each versions supported) and in the pci id database. What kind of madness is it ? How many people do you expect to update *four* lists with the same info (and btw the last time I checked 2.4 followups were not merged in 2.5) ? And all this time lspci knew my chip. In fact, I *used* lspci info to get the right info to put in the kernel. And to this day since not everything was merged in 2.5 lspci is more accurate than the kernel. So from my very naïve point of view /proc/pci wouldn't be mourned, quite the contrary. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 11:31 [W:0.670 / U:0.440 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||