RE: hotplug TTD

["Grover, Andrew" <andrew.grover@intel.com>]

Is it unreasonable, long-term, to move towards a unified Linux hotplug
architecture?

Under both Windows and BeOS, a given bus driver is responsible for
enumerating the devices on it, and it tells a central "configuration
manager", who then is the one who loads the drivers.

Having one entity who knows about all devices on a system is also great for
power management, and implementing suspend-to-memory and suspend-to-disk.

Thoughts?

Regards -- Andy


> From: Adam J. Richter [mailto:adam@yggdrasil.com]
>         Perhaps I'm just being pedantic, but I'd like to just clarify
> that many of the Linux-related facilities that people refer to as
> "hot plugging" in are not really hot plugging, but rather a set of
> facilities used by most of the kernel hot plugging schemes:
> 
>                 1. a standardized hardware identification scheme
>                    for the bus in question (ISAPnP, PCI, USB, other
>                    systems covered by Intel Plug'n'Play 
> standards, etc.)
> 
>                 2. a facility for dynamically loading kernel driver
>                    modules for that bus.
> 
>                 3. A MODULE_DEVICE_ID table for that format in each
>                    relevant driver.
> 
>                 4. Support for that ID table format in depmod
>         
>                 5.  A user level program that reads the 
> appropriate depmod
>                     modules.___map and figures out which 
> modules to load.
> 
>         For example, I understand that ISAPnP hardware is not
> capable of hot plugging, but it uses these same facilities.
> Conceivably, other non-hotplug busses that have quasi-standard
> schemes for hardware enumeration could use these facilities
> as well (NuBus? S-Bus?).


_______________________________________________
Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list
Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel