Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Takahashi Yoshihiro writes: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Cbus is to ISA as CardBus is to PCI in many ways. Cbus is very much like ISA in all but a few details. CardBus is pci with a few twists and turns that differ. If you look at how we've implemented cardbus, you'll see that we've tried to do it as a 'subclass' of the pci bus. We implement the PCI interfaces in the cardbus bus code, even though it is not really a pci bus. I'd propose that cbus implements the ISA interfaces in a similar manner. If my understanding is not a mistake, the CardBus specifications is derived from the PCI. Therefore, I can understand that the cardbus driver depend on the pci driver. But, the Cbus is NOT derived from the ISA. So, I think that the cbus driver should not depend on the isa driver. This increasingly sounds like an emotional thing rather than a technical thing :-( -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Cbus is to ISA as CardBus is to PCI in many ways. Cbus is very much like ISA in all but a few details. CardBus is pci with a few twists and turns that differ. If you look at how we've implemented cardbus, you'll see that we've tried to do it as a 'subclass' of the pci bus. We implement the PCI interfaces in the cardbus bus code, even though it is not really a pci bus. I'd propose that cbus implements the ISA interfaces in a similar manner. If my understanding is not a mistake, the CardBus specifications is derived from the PCI. Therefore, I can understand that the cardbus driver depend on the pci driver. But, the Cbus is NOT derived from the ISA. So, I think that the cbus driver should not depend on the isa driver. --- TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can understand if you do not like to call your cbus hardware ISA devices, but also consider that on most pc-at hardware there are no ISA devices either. These are completely different. All PC-98 machines don't have ISA devices and buses at all, but a little old PC-AT machines have ISA buses. And, even if the PC-AT machine does not have ISA buses, it has PCI-ISA bridge. Things like the floppy controller, keyboard controller, counter/timer, rtc, etc etc are all on motherboard busses. Many are on things like X-bus, v-link, or other custom quick and dirty host busses. FYI, NetBSD/pc98 has the systm virtual bus. I would rather live with #ifdef PC98 than to have a duplicate set of isa/* and i386/* files that are nearly identical except for include file paths, #ifdef PC98 and s/isa/cbus/. I'm sure there are other ways to improve the situation without having to resort to this mass duplication of code. How? I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think that adding separated cbus driver is better way. --- TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Takahashi Yoshihiro wrote: These are completely different. All PC-98 machines don't have ISA devices and buses at all, but a little old PC-AT machines have ISA buses. And, even if the PC-AT machine does not have ISA buses, it has PCI-ISA bridge. This is semantics; like it or not the PC-98 boxes do have something that fits into the definition of ISA. -- | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL| ix86,sparc,pmax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | For Great Justice! | ISO8802.5 4ever | To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think that adding separated cbus driver is better way. So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Peter Wemm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : I can understand if you do not like to call your cbus hardware ISA : devices, but also consider that on most pc-at hardware there are no ISA : devices either. : : These are completely different. All PC-98 machines don't have ISA : devices and buses at all, but a little old PC-AT machines have ISA : buses. And, even if the PC-AT machine does not have ISA buses, it : has PCI-ISA bridge. I understand this. : Things like the floppy controller, keyboard controller, : counter/timer, rtc, etc etc are all on motherboard busses. Many are on : things like X-bus, v-link, or other custom quick and dirty host busses. : : FYI, NetBSD/pc98 has the systm virtual bus. It might be worth considering this in the long term. For the moment, however, I'm not sure sure this is the right way to go. : I would rather live with #ifdef PC98 than : to have a duplicate set of isa/* and i386/* files that are nearly identical : except for include file paths, #ifdef PC98 and s/isa/cbus/. I'm sure there : are other ways to improve the situation without having to resort to this : mass duplication of code. : : How? : : I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 : uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think : that adding separated cbus driver is better way. I think that adding a separate cbus driver is better. I understand why you want it. I just object to the way you've done it. Cbus is to ISA as CardBus is to PCI in many ways. Cbus is very much like ISA in all but a few details. CardBus is pci with a few twists and turns that differ. If you look at how we've implemented cardbus, you'll see that we've tried to do it as a 'subclass' of the pci bus. We implement the PCI interfaces in the cardbus bus code, even though it is not really a pci bus. I'd propose that cbus implements the ISA interfaces in a similar manner. I'll be the first to admit that the cardbus implementation in this area is incomplete. sys/dev/cardbus/cardbus.c contains too much pci bus code copied with s/pci/cardbus/g applied. Not all the pci drivers that can be cardbus drivers also have the appropriate designation in the sys/conf/files file. However, most cardbus drivers are written by adding one line to the pci attachment. I suspect that for the vast majority of the ISA drivers this would hold true for cbus. I know others have said that there is no need at all for cbus as a separate bus. I'd argue that we do need a separate bus for it, since it is more different than ISA than the xbus, vlink are. However, it isn't so different that it needs its own CBUS_PNP_PROBE interface that is identical to ISA_PNP_PROBE (even if the implementation of the PNP probing is different). Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 : uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think : that adding separated cbus driver is better way. : : So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so : you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there : any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? That's a little too harsh. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], M. Warner Losh writes: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 : uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think : that adding separated cbus driver is better way. : : So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so : you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there : any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? That's a little too harsh. I actually think that it would be an improvement over the current copy-the-isa-file-and-add-#ifdef-PC98-making-diffs-hard-to-read approach. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], M. Warner Losh writes: : In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 : : uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think : : that adding separated cbus driver is better way. : : : : So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so : : you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there : : any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? : : That's a little too harsh. : : I actually think that it would be an improvement over the current : copy-the-isa-file-and-add-#ifdef-PC98-making-diffs-hard-to-read : approach. Have you looked at the actual patch? That's exactly what this patch does more of. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so : you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there : any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? That's a little too harsh. No, it's an honest question. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : M. Warner Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so : : you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there : : any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? : That's a little too harsh. : : No, it's an honest question. No, it is a harsh way of asking the question. That's what I'm grumping about. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], M. Warner Losh writes: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], M. Warner Losh writes: : In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : : I have had some questions like Does PC98 have ISA bus? or Why PC98 : : uses ISA driver?. To clear these questions and problems, I think : : that adding separated cbus driver is better way. : : : : So you're duplicating a large amount of existing, working code just so : : you can avoid answering questions from confused users? Or are there : : any actual technical advantages to having a separate cbus driver? : : That's a little too harsh. : : I actually think that it would be an improvement over the current : copy-the-isa-file-and-add-#ifdef-PC98-making-diffs-hard-to-read : approach. Have you looked at the actual patch? That's exactly what this patch does more of. Then I misunderstood the quoted bits of the patch, sorry. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : I have made the cbus driver for pc98 based on i386 isa driver. This : completely removes that PC98 depends on isa driver and also corrects : directory layouts (pc98/i386 - pc98/pc98 and pc98/pc98 - pc98/cbus). : : The full patch can get from : http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus.diff.gz : : Soeren, please review the ata part. : http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-ata.diff.gz : : Warner, please review the oldcard part. : http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-pccard.diff.gz : : : If it has no problem, I'll commit after required repository copy. Please excuse my tardiness in replying to this review request. I've just finished a large release at work that was consuming much of my time. I do not like this. It seems to take too many files and just do a simple s/isa/cbus/g on them. However, I'm not sure that we want to do that with so many files when the majority of them are very close to being able to just add a second module line. I think it would be better to implement cbus as an 'isa bus subclass'. cbus is an isa-like bus in many respects from a programming point of view. Copying everything is not the right way to approach this problem, imho. It would be better if the cbus bus implemented the isa routines and accepted that 'isa' is a bit if a misnomer. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
M. Warner Losh wrote: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Takahashi Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : I have made the cbus driver for pc98 based on i386 isa driver. This : completely removes that PC98 depends on isa driver and also corrects : directory layouts (pc98/i386 - pc98/pc98 and pc98/pc98 - pc98/cbus). : : The full patch can get from : http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus.diff.gz : : Soeren, please review the ata part. : http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-ata.diff.gz : : Warner, please review the oldcard part. : http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-pccard.diff.gz : : : If it has no problem, I'll commit after required repository copy. Please excuse my tardiness in replying to this review request. I've just finished a large release at work that was consuming much of my time. I do not like this. It seems to take too many files and just do a simple s/isa/cbus/g on them. However, I'm not sure that we want to do that with so many files when the majority of them are very close to being able to just add a second module line. I think it would be better to implement cbus as an 'isa bus subclass'. cbus is an isa-like bus in many respects from a programming point of view. Copying everything is not the right way to approach this problem, imho. It would be better if the cbus bus implemented the isa routines and accepted that 'isa' is a bit if a misnomer. I can understand if you do not like to call your cbus hardware ISA devices, but also consider that on most pc-at hardware there are no ISA devices either. Things like the floppy controller, keyboard controller, counter/timer, rtc, etc etc are all on motherboard busses. Many are on things like X-bus, v-link, or other custom quick and dirty host busses. If we started i386/x-bus/* and i386/v-link/* etc then things would get ugly very quickly. Personally, I would rather live with #ifdef PC98 than to have a duplicate set of isa/* and i386/* files that are nearly identical except for include file paths, #ifdef PC98 and s/isa/cbus/. I'm sure there are other ways to improve the situation without having to resort to this mass duplication of code. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
The cbus driver for pc98
I have made the cbus driver for pc98 based on i386 isa driver. This completely removes that PC98 depends on isa driver and also corrects directory layouts (pc98/i386 - pc98/pc98 and pc98/pc98 - pc98/cbus). The full patch can get from http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus.diff.gz Soeren, please review the ata part. http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-ata.diff.gz Warner, please review the oldcard part. http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-pccard.diff.gz If it has no problem, I'll commit after required repository copy. --- TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The cbus driver for pc98
It seems Takahashi Yoshihiro wrote: I have made the cbus driver for pc98 based on i386 isa driver. This completely removes that PC98 depends on isa driver and also corrects directory layouts (pc98/i386 - pc98/pc98 and pc98/pc98 - pc98/cbus). Soeren, please review the ata part. http://home.jp.FreeBSD.org/~nyan/patches/cbus-ata.diff.gz That looks good to me, it does conflict with my current ATA version soon to be released but I'll try to integrate it there as well. It would be nice if we could get rid of the old wd* crap at the same time, forcing user to the new system seems to be the only way to get me proper error reports :/ -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
