[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: PnP model
> > In many cases, Auto configuration can be better then manual 
> > configuration.
> > 1.) The auto configuration engine in my patch is able to
> > resolve almost any
> > resource conflict and provides the greatest chance for all
> > devices to have
> > resources allocated.
> > 2.) Certainly some driver developers would like to manually
> > set resources
> > but many may prefer the option to auto config.
> I think the people who want to manually configure their device's
> resources need to step up and justify why this is really necessary.

Prototyping an embedded system, maybe, where you have devices in the
test box that won't be in the production machine. You would want them
to use resources other than those that you want the hardware which
will be present to use.

> If someone is manually configuring something, that means the automatic
> config *failed*.

Not necessarily.

> Why did it fail? It should never fail. Manual config is only giving
> the user to opportunity to get something wrong.

Agreed, auto configuration should never fail, but that doesn't mean
that you shouldn't have manual configuration as an option.

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 13:32    [W:0.060 / U:1.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site