On 10/10/2016 18:26, Warner Losh wrote:
> I see no reason not to start the table right away based on
> smbios.sys.product and other criteria. I don't think we need all the
> matches that Linux uses, but we can expand the table if we find it so.
> Why have a stop gap that's a table that we kludge together when the
> real table is of comparable difficulty and wouldn't need to be
> reworked.

One simple reason for me personally.  I do not have the hardware and I am not
particularly interested in it.  I am interested only in cleaning up the smbus
interface and moving ig4iic to iicbus.  I want to get done with that as quickly
as possible and my goal is just that the result is not worse than the current 
I am sure that people who are more interested than me can make the code much 

> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Michael Gmelin <gre...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:35:22 +0300
>> Andriy Gapon <a...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> On 09/10/2016 23:22, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>> There seems to be enough information present in the smbios data to
>>>> know what devices are at what addresses. Perhaps we should use it as
>>>> much as possible in well controlled situations to move this
>>>> knowledge into the OS.
>>> So, I was thinking about maybe doing something like this to preserve
>>> the status quo, to avoid requiring manual hints and to lay a
>>> foundation for the proper Chromebook I2C slave discovery:

Andriy Gapon
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to