Re: sio => uart: one port is gone



On Monday 15 September 2008 12:55:33 pm Marcel Moolenaar wrote:

On Sep 15, 2008, at 9:47 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:

on 15/09/2008 19:41 Marcel Moolenaar said the following:
So, if you compile acpi(4) as a module, you must compile all
it's depending drivers as modules as well. Or you compile acpi
into the kernel...

I understand the logic, but OTOH uart can work without acpi too, so
it's not a strict dependency.

Well, yes. That's what's causing your "problem". You compile a
kernel without acpi but with uart. As such, uart will be built
without acpi support. uart does indeed work without acpi.

The problem is that people then load the acpi module at runtime
and expect uart to work with acpi. That's not going to fly. If
one builds uart as a module, all possible support is included
and it works as expected.

Also, this (acpi dependency) doesn't seem to be documented.

It's standard behaviour.

The problem is that right now we ship with acpi.ko as a module by default and
have the loader auto-load acpi.ko IFF the machine supports ACPI. Considering
how cheap a bus attachment is, I find this argument rather rediculous. If
you are building uart into the kernel on i386, just always include the acpi
attachment. Other drivers give a more sane user experience. GENERIC should
DTRT out-of-the-box, for example.

--
John Baldwin
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"



Relevant Pages

  • Re: sio => uart: one port is gone
    ... it's depending drivers as modules as well. ... I understand the logic, but OTOH uart can work without acpi too, so it's not a strict dependency. ... without acpi support. ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: sio => uart: one port is gone
    ... it's depending drivers as modules as well. ... kernel without acpi but with uart. ... without acpi support. ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: sio => uart: one port is gone
    ... it's depending drivers as modules as well. ... I understand the logic, but OTOH uart can work without acpi too, so ... without acpi support. ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: sio => uart: one port is gone
    ... On Sep 15, 2008, at 12:22 PM, John Baldwin wrote: ... I understand the logic, but OTOH uart can work without acpi too, so ... without acpi support. ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: sio => uart: one port is gone
    ... it's depending drivers as modules as well. ... I understand the logic, but OTOH uart can work without acpi too, so ... without acpi support. ...
    (freebsd-current)