On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 14:55 -0500, Joseph Jezak wrote: > Well, here's the problem. There are a few places where a value is > changed (different value written to a register). Does this mean > that the value is different due to the uCode changes (can't tell, no > documentation)? From what I've seen in the ucode that question isn't really too hard to answer: as long as it's not in the shared memory or ucode register space the ucode can't really have an influence. > Is it applicable to all revisions (can't tell, some > revisions are not supported in this version)? Best bet would be to make it conditional right now and have someone test for these cases with older hw. > If the revision > number range in a check changes is that because of a difference in > supported cards or a bug fix? Hmm. Same I guess, use the new check for new hw and the old check for old hw, i.e. assume it's the former and not a bug fix (until tested otherwise.) I think our best bet is to treat the older hw the same as the older driver does. A bigger problem, IMO, is that we'd have to support all the older microcode things which is a bit tricky since things in shm have moved a lot... Maybe we should find a third maintainer who has access to a couple of old cards :) johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
