On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Quentin Garnier wrote:
> Because wss(4) maps only the first two regions, probably because the
> third is indeed supposed to be the SoundBlaster compatibility interface,
> and that sharing irq 5 between the two is not an issue.  The latter
> seems weird, though.

Should we have wss_acpi map all regions? I would expect bad things to 
happen if we tried to drive both of those interfaces at the same time..

Cheers,
Jared