[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] net #3
"David Woodhouse wrote:"
> said:
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_ISAPNP
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_ISAPNP) || (defined(CONFIG_ISAPNP_MODULE) && defined(MODULE))
> The result here would be a 3c509 module which differs depending on whether
> the ISAPNP module happened to be compiled at the same time or not.

I'm just thinking whether the ISA PnP hardware related modules should depend
on isa-pnp.o at all
(I mean having different behaviour of a the SAME (compiled) module depending
on whether isa-pnp.o is available or not)

It is just adding some persistent pointers for isa-pnp functions to the
kernel and teaching the modules to use request_module(). Probably also some
hacking to keep away from already used ISA PnP hardware during

Also implementing "nopnp" option should be mandatory, IMHO.

> The ISAPNP-specific parts of the code aren't large. Please consider
> including them unconditionally instead.

I see no objection if __init for modules is implemented...

Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz
phone (48)(58) 347 14 61
Faculty of Applied Phys. & Math., Technical University of Gdansk

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:54    [W:0.035 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site