my thoughts inline...

On 03/26/13 05:20, Ted Unangst wrote:
> These isa devs are already disabled and not particularly popular among
> our users.  affected: tcic, sea, wds, eg, el
> Index: arch/i386/conf/GENERIC
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/i386/conf/GENERIC,v
> -pcmcia* at tcic?

I really can't comment.  Haven't had much luck with PCMCIA lately.
Haven't cared enough to,

> -sea0 at isa? disable iomem 0xc8000 irq 5 # Seagate ST0[12] SCSI controllers

this driver doesn't work anyway, or at least it didn't, somewhere over
ten years ago when I last tried.  If it did work, you wouldn't want it
to.  It was intended for things like scanners and other really slow things.

> -wds0 at isa? disable port 0x350 irq 15 drq 6 # WD7000 and TMC-7000 
> controllers
> -#wds1        at isa? port 0x358 irq 11 drq 5

I've never seen one of these.  That says something.  Not sure what.

> -eg0  at isa? disable port 0x310 irq 5        # 3C505/Etherlink+ ethernet

This is an incredibly rare, huge, power hungry NIC.  I've got one, I
think.  Never tested it.  It came from the store I worked at, we tried
to sell them for $600-$700 each, back in the mid 1980s.  The one I think
I have is the store demo, we never sold any.  It was kinda cool in that
it was a 16 bit card with its own 80186 CPU on it...but for use, it is

> -el0  at isa? disable port 0x300 irq 9        # 3C501 ethernet

This is probably the worst Ethernet card ever built and sold.
Apparently, it has ONE buffer, which can be receiving data, sending
data, or dropping data when switching between the two modes.

IF anyone in the U.S. is running a 3c501 or a 3c505 and is upset with
this being removed. I'll send you a 3c509B.  You will be very happy with it.

None of this stuff will be missed by users.  The only question would be
the tcic, I don't know what it would be in.  I suspect it would be a
non-issue, it's probably old enough to be in laptops which were rarely
expanded to 32M RAM.

There is a lot of ISA stuff I'd object to removing from the kernel; none
of this is it.  I'm entirely ok with this stuff going...


Reply via email to