On 14-01-08 23:26, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Saturday 12 January 2008 11:13:35 pm Rene Herman wrote: >> I find DISABLE including DO_NOT_CHANGE rather unexpected... > > I don't know the history of those flags, but I wish they didn't exist. > They really look like warts in the PNP core code. They're used so > infrequently and without obvious rationale, that it seems like it'd > be better if there were a way to deal with them inside the driver. I see, thanks for the comment. PNP_DRIVER_RES_DISABLE is used by ALSA only and used by _all_ ALSA ISA-PnP drivers (snd-sscape uses RES_DO_NOT_CHANGE instead but we should consider that one a consistency bug). RES_DO_NOT_CHANGE is used by drivers/pnp/system.c and rtc-cmos.c as well. I'll look at this. Getting rid of DISABLE as a first step should not be overly problematic. This might again be a left-over from days where no easy to use interface to PnP existed which it now does in echoing things into sysfs. Takashi: which reminds me -- crap, I promised to document more of that for ALSA use following up the recent pnp driver-side resource setting removal. Sorry, forgot, will do. > This had to do with the excessive warnings about exceeding the maximum > number of resources for a PNP device. This should be resolved by Len's > patch here: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9535#c10 > > We all agree this is a stop-gap, and for 2.6.25, we need the real > solution of making PNP resources fully dynamic. Thank you. Just pulled and see that's now indeed in. Wasn't in -rc7 yet... Rene. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
