Re: [PATCH] Fallback to PCI IRQs for TI bridges

[David Hinds <dhinds@sonic.net>]

On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 12:26:54PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> 
> I'm not aware of the "political" situation around PCMCIA drivers, but I
> think it's sad that the kernel drivers are pushed (e.g. by Red Hat) in the
> hope that they will get more visibility and will be improved, but the
> people who have the best expertize still use pcmcia-cs drivers and work on
> improving them.

I don't think it is a political issue.  I think the kernel drivers
should be promoted and I've encourated other distributions to go that
route as well.  And I hope that this leads to better drivers.  I do
maintenance work on the pcmcia-cs drivers but don't intend to add any
new functionality.

I've tried to update the kernel tree with fixes from individual PCMCIA
client drivers in the pcmcia-cs package.  The divergence of the core
modules is pretty large, though, so it is not a simple "diff", and I
know I've missed things.

I do not have time to be a more active maintainer these days, either
of pcmcia-cs or of the kernel PCMCIA drivers.

> I think it CONFIG_ISA is meant to be that.  The "ISA support" is so
> trivial from the kernel perspective, that the line between systems with
> and without ISA is somewhat blurred.

I don't really know what the scope of CONFIG_ISA should be.  I think
now it is mainly used to show or hide drivers for ISA cards, rather
than describing a system capability.

-- Dave