Re: [PARPORT] parport-doc: are get_fifo_residue and change_mode even needed?

Philip Blundell (philb@gnu.org)
Fri, 14 May 1999 21:33:26 +0100

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: Tim Waugh: "[PARPORT] patch-2.3.1-tmw1"
• Previous message: Tim Waugh: "Re: [PARPORT] Re: Parport & DMA -- patch-2.2.7-tmw3"
• In reply to: Thomas Sailer: "Re: [PARPORT] Re: Parport & DMA -- patch-2.2.7-tmw3"

>parport_frob_control(...INTEN) can do the same job. But I wonder if
>that's the right way to go, or whether to say that the 'control' register
>consists of bits that directly control lines.

The latter, very definitely. Overloading the `control' register too much just
adds pain for people implementing non-PC ports. Keep it for bits that
actually drive signals directly.

p.

-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: linux-parport-request@torque.net --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --

• Next message: Tim Waugh: "[PARPORT] patch-2.3.1-tmw1"
• Previous message: Tim Waugh: "Re: [PARPORT] Re: Parport & DMA -- patch-2.2.7-tmw3"
• In reply to: Thomas Sailer: "Re: [PARPORT] Re: Parport & DMA -- patch-2.2.7-tmw3"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri 14 May 1999 - 16:49:51 EDT