> On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>
> > George writes:
> > > On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> > >
> [snip]
>
> > 6. This won't let us reallocate devices. If I have n IRQs available
> > for the ISA bus and cards that need n+2 IRQs, I ought to be able
> > to use all but 2 devices at the same time without deciding that
> > 2 particular devices just won't ever function. The kernel needs
> > to move IRQs as needed so that I can freely use my hardware.
>
> Or, of course like all intelligent busses, use shared IRQ's.
>
> Think MCA, PCI (?)...
And to answer my own post, I didn't mean that ISA should use shared IRQ's,
because it's too stupid to do this... Get a better bus or accept fixed
_IRQ's, is my opinion. We might well try to explain this to the users, but
we shouldn't adhere to Micro$oftish beaviour "well, stability isn't
important as long as people can use cheap hardware on our system"...
/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/