[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: de4x5.c patch against 2.1.117
Chris Wedgwood <> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 26, 1998 at 09:57:27AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Quite frankly, PnP as a standard sucks. Anything that just reads
> > the PnP standard and tries to force that on Linux will be most
> > definitely ignored.
> Since M$ and Intel have agreed more or less to kill ISA, how much PnP
> stuff is really needed in the kernel long term?

Didn't hear from M$ 'bout killing ISA :), however, these days you
don't have much problems running PnP compeletely from userspace.

The solution implies you have modularized device drivers and you run
isapnp userspace tool, before modules get loaded. And that's it.

> So far, the only convincing argument for putting PnP (ISA PnP anyhow)
> in the kernel is to make certain NICs work, but in machines I have
> access too - the BIOS does this anyway.

Here, you make an assumption BIOS will do the dirty work for
yourself. Not all BIOS-es support PnP, so you definitely need help
from OS to do some things.

At least my BIOS can't initialize hardware properly. :)

> What exactly in kernel PnP required for? I don't even this Winduhs
> does PnP in the kernel entirely, it looks to me like its controlled
> from userland using kernel stubs.

Didn't investigate M$ quasi-OS-es internals, sorry. :)

Posted by Zlatko Calusic E-mail: <>
Sign here please:_______________________Thanks.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.100 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site