Message-ID: <41FADC38.4090108@drzeus.cx>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 01:43:36 +0100
From: Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@drzeus.cx>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adam Belay <ambx1@neo.rr.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: PNP and bus association
References: <41F95A42.40001@drzeus.cx> <20050128224752.GA2545@neo.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050128224752.GA2545@neo.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1093
Lines: 28

Adam Belay wrote:

>Hi Pierre,
>
>The platform bus does not show the actual physical relationship either.  For
>x86, ACPI is typically needed to determine this. It would be easy to bind to
>spawn pnp devices off of an ISA bridge device, attached to the pci bus, but
>whether it's the actual physical parent would be very difficult to determine
>without firmware assistance.
>
>At the moment the pnp bus is only showing a logical bus relationship.  If we
>were to use ACPI to aid in the generation of the physical device tree, we
>could put these devices in the correct physical location.
>  
>
So it is correct behaviour that the device shows up under /sys/bus/pnp 
when found using PNP, and /sys/bus/platform when scanned for?
I'm trying to get it to work well with HAL and it would be nice if it 
could be found in a consistent way.

Rgds
Pierre

-
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/