Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 06:03:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 06:03:57 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:27666 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 06:03:56 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:10:10 +0200 Message-ID: From: Takashi Iwai To: Osamu Tomita Cc: "'LKML '" Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 22/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (sound alsa) In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.6.1 (Upside Down) SEMI/1.14.4 (Hosorogi) FLIM/1.14.4 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Kashiharajing=FE-mae?=) APEL/10.2 MULE XEmacs/21.4 (patch 8) (Honest Recruiter) (i386-suse-linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.4 - "Hosorogi") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2176 Lines: 58 Hi, At Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:47:55 +0900, Osamu Tomita wrote: > > Hi. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Takashi Iwai > To: Osamu Tomita > Cc: LKML > Sent: 2002/10/24 0:46 > Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 22/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (sound > alsa) > > > the question is, whether cs4232 module works on PC9800, or not. > > i guess the control-port is not used on this card. in such a case, > > you can deactivate the control-port via module option (or even add > > ifdef for the specific kernel config). > Test results on some PC-9800 (including not CS4232 chip), > snd-cs4232 driver works fine with snd_isapnp=0 snd_cport=-1 options. > Thanks for your advice. > > Another problem, I'm tring to separate mpu401 driver for PC-9800. > To do this, I need to patch many files. So I think previus patch is > better than separated driver. How do you think? for which card (chip), is the modification of mpu401 necessary? if it's only for the cs4232 (on-board?) above, then we can make a new top-level module, such like snd-pc98-somewhat, which uses the cs4231 lowlevel module without isapnp stuff, and the modified mpu401 routines, so that the original cs4231 and mpu401 are not changed too much. even if cs4231 low-level routines must be changed for pc98, we can pass the hardware-type CS4231_HW_PC98 in snd_cs4231_create(), and as Alan suggested, the pc98-specific codes run on this condition. although this is true for mpu401, the large initialization-code found in the last patch is definitely not for the "common" module like mpu401_uart.c. such a thing should go into the device-specific module. since both cs4231 and mpu401_uart are shared among veraious drivers, changing such a common module results in breakage of other drivers. (please note that even some pci drivers use mpu401 low-level module.) or, the change for mpu401 is always necessary on PC9800 regardless of which device is used? ciao, Takashi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/