public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>
To: andrew.grover@intel.com (Grover, Andrew)
Cc: ambx1@neo.rr.com, perex@perex.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	greg@kroah.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: PnP model
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 19:40:37 +0000 (GMT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200302041940.h14JebCX002683@darkstar.example.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F760B14C9561B941B89469F59BA3A84725A152@orsmsx401.jf.intel.com> from "Grover, Andrew" at Feb 04, 2003 11:25:42 AM

> > In many cases, Auto configuration can be better then manual 
> > configuration.
> > 1.) The auto configuration engine in my patch is able to 
> > resolve almost any
> > resource conflict and provides the greatest chance for all 
> > devices to have
> > resources allocated.
> > 2.) Certainly some driver developers would like to manually 
> > set resources
> > but many may prefer the option to auto config.
> 
> I think the people who want to manually configure their device's
> resources need to step up and justify why this is really necessary.

Prototyping an embedded system, maybe, where you have devices in the
test box that won't be in the production machine.  You would want them
to use resources other than those that you want the hardware which
will be present to use.

> If someone is manually configuring something, that means the automatic
> config *failed*.

Not necessarily.

> Why did it fail? It should never fail. Manual config is only giving
> the user to opportunity to get something wrong.

Agreed, auto configuration should never fail, but that doesn't mean
that you shouldn't have manual configuration as an option.

John.

  reply	other threads:[~2003-02-04 19:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-02-04 19:25 PnP model Grover, Andrew
2003-02-04 19:40 ` John Bradford [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-02-04 19:53 Grover, Andrew
2003-02-04 22:56 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-06 18:49 ` Adam Belay
2003-02-03 15:31 PnP Model James Bottomley
2003-02-03 16:41 ` Alan Cox
2003-02-04 16:45   ` James Bottomley
2003-02-02 20:36 [PATCH][RFC] Resource Management Improvements (1/4) Adam Belay
2003-02-03 13:55 ` PnP model Jaroslav Kysela
2003-02-03 15:45   ` Alan Cox
2003-02-03 20:43   ` Adam Belay
2003-02-04  9:46     ` Russell King
2003-02-04 10:18       ` Jaroslav Kysela
2003-02-04 10:49         ` Russell King
2003-02-05 21:34           ` Adam Belay
2003-02-07  8:56             ` Jaroslav Kysela
2003-02-04 10:40     ` Jaroslav Kysela

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200302041940.h14JebCX002683@darkstar.example.net \
    --to=john@grabjohn.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=ambx1@neo.rr.com \
    --cc=andrew.grover@intel.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=perex@perex.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox