From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 05:16:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 05:16:47 -0400 Received: from ns.commfireservices.com ([216.6.9.162]:1043 "HELO hemi.commfireservices.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 05:16:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 05:20:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Zwane Mwaikambo X-X-Sender: zwane@montezuma.mastecende.com To: Marek Michalkiewicz Cc: twaugh@redhat.com, , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [patch] fix parport_serial / serial link order (for 2.4.20-pre8) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Marek Michalkiewicz wrote: > What are these issues? If they are caused by IRQ sharing between > parallel and serial ports, and parport works fine in polling mode > (it does for me, I've done quite a lot of printing), I'd suggest > to use polling for now, and leave IRQ sharing support for later... Tim would know better there since he removed it, but iirc it had something to do with the BARs used, hmm your card has the same PCI id and is serial neutered to an extent, what happens if you treat it as if it really does have both serial ports there? Does it still work without causing other problems so you can safely ignore it? FYI, Interrupt driven works great for me. > The parport_serial / serial link order issue is quite old - is > everyone using modular kernels (not affected by it) these days? > Perhaps all of parport_serial should still be CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL ;) link order shouldn't affect the decision seeing as it affects all parport_serial anyway. You might have to wait it out and see what Tim/Ed have to say but i do have patches for both lying about. Cheers, Zwane -- function.linuxpower.ca