Re: 2.1.93..

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 01:35:18 +0100 (BST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: More parport troubles"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: T/TCP: Syn and RST Cookies"

> The BIOS probe order is different from machine to machine or even from BIOS
> release to BIOS release. The new PCI subsystem now always sorts the devices by
> bus/device/function lexicographically, so you get the same order not depending
> on whether you use the BIOS or not. The latest PCI patch I've sent to the list
> adds an option to reverse the order to be compatible with 2.0.X.

Why not keep the BIOS order. Its the order in every other OS you boot on the
same machine, its an order available to you and it means little things like
Lilo and the OS agree which bios disk is which linux disk.

The change is utterly pointless. We should use BIOS order on a PC at least.
BIOS order is the existing, normal and defacto ordering for such systems. Like
it or not.

Alan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: More parport troubles"
Previous message: Alan Cox: "Re: T/TCP: Syn and RST Cookies"