[lkml]   [1996]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: CONFIG_PNP: Please change the name
    Kenneth Albanowski wrote:
    > On Sun, 17 Mar 1996, hab wrote:
    > > If you read the chain my response was to a hardware developer
    > > who solicited questions about the pitfalls of PnP at the time
    > > I had the problems Linux did not have PnP, and your implementation
    > > may work the majority of the time but I do not believe you are
    > > an all knowing being and I am sure that problems will be found.
    > > My suggestion was to allow the Knowedgable "Power User" the
    > > ability to overide automatic selections.
    > Hubert, please understand that PnP does _not_ soley consist of
    I think I fully understand Plug and Play. It is a very desirable
    goal to be able to plug in a peripeheral device into a bus slot
    and have the system recognize what resources are required and insure
    no conflicts exist. True it allows software to be written to
    automate this configuration. It is still my contention that a well
    designed board will allow the manual overide of these features for
    the power user, who has the right reason to make the override.
    I would call it Power user Overide. I've been writing software
    and designing hardware too many years to assume that I can do
    everything after the hardware is powered up. So as long as other
    design considerations allow it I will always choose the board that
    will allow manual setting of at least intial resource allocations.
    I fully prefer those that allow me to do power on configuration, either
    automatic or semi as long as they also give me manual options as well.
    I believe that the better products will have both features
    and and are well worth the additional cost. My time is way too
    valuable to try to save the last penny on hardware outlay. I also
    prefer those products that provide excellent documentation, prefererably
    machine readable. Right now Plug N Play still seems to be a selling
    feature that is substituted for poor documentation in some off brand
    boards. In my recent upgrades I ran into poor PnP and good PnP
    implementations. The good implementations were not afraid to give me
    manual options as well. Be careful in sellecting Plug N Play products,
    Especially if you want to mix it with non-plug and play boards on
    platforms that use more than one OS. My recomendation to a hardware
    designer who is developing a new product is still please provide some
    manual control to give the power user some flexability to over come
    unforseen requirements.
    PCMCIA is one place where the manual overrides is probably
    one place where the manual override in impractical.
    By the way there are users that I fully recomend plug and
    play to. I made the assumption that the Hardware person who asked
    about pitfalls was truely interested in why some of us had found
    problems with PnP. I did not say that I had abandoned PnP, only
    that I was selective in which PnP devices I bought.

    Hubert Bahr

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.026 / U:23.756 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site