From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hancock.sc.steeleye.com (nat9.steeleye.com [65.114.3.137]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C8F4840 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:33:13 -0600 (MDT) Received: from midgard.sc.steeleye.com (midgard.sc.steeleye.com [172.17.6.40]) by hancock.sc.steeleye.com (8.11.6/linuxconf) with ESMTP id h8UFWRq16752; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:32:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Re: NCR53c720 From: James Bottomley To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Rene Brothuhn , Roman Zippel , Linux/m68k , parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org, Linux/PPC on APUS development In-Reply-To: <20030930135914.GW24824@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <1064929633.2183.7.camel@mulgrave> <20030930135914.GW24824@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Date: 30 Sep 2003 10:32:23 -0500 Message-Id: <1064935949.1930.6.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 08:59, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > It makes a lot of sense to treat all the devices that firmware tells us > about as parisc_devices since we treat them all the same way. If we > were stepping over ourselves saying "well, yes, this is a pluggable > device and therefore we have to access it like that, but this one's > on the motherboard and therefore we treat it like that", I'd agree. > But all these devices are in the same namespace, firmware tells us > about all of them in the same way, so I think we should continue with > the parisc_device. Yes, I was just musing about the way we did it. In theory, the difference between a "platform" device and a generic device is that a generic device has a bus, and a platform one doesn't. The platform_device also has a resource pointer and a few other bits and pieces the generic device doesn't. What I did for PA was to create a parisc bus type, and attach all the inventoried hardware to it. This blurs the bus distinction in generic device because we have several inventoried buses: Runway, GSC, LASI etc. that are all lumped under the parisc bus. I was just wondering if it wouldn't make more sense now for us to be using platform devices too... James > >From a historical perspective, we've had parisc_devices in > one form or another since the very start of the project. > They were called hp_devices until about August 2001. See > http://ftp.parisc-linux.org/patches/parisc_device-2.diff for the > conversion. > > I don't know much about Amiga/Zorro. Maybe it'd make sense for Amiga > platform devices to be faked as zorro_devices, but I doubt it. In > any case, the 4000T SCSI is a 53c710, not a 720. > > -- > "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or > victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. > Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk