From owner-freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 18 18:20:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B974E16A415 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [69.147.83.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3608A43D81 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kAIIKUVA087694 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:30 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id kAIIKU0w087693; Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:30 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:30 GMT Message-Id: <200611181820.kAIIKU0w087693@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.org From: puc-uart@oldach.net (Helge Oldach) Cc: Subject: Re: i386/105616: UART PCI device just silent... X-BeenThere: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Helge Oldach List-Id: I386-specific issues for FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:31 -0000 The following reply was made to PR i386/105616; it has been noted by GNATS. From: puc-uart@oldach.net (Helge Oldach) To: xcllnt@mac.com (Marcel Moolenaar) Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: i386/105616: UART PCI device just silent... Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 19:14:22 +0100 (CET) Hi Marcel, thanks for your response. Marcel Moolenaar: >On Nov 16, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Helge Oldach wrote: > >> --- sys/dev/uart/uart_bus_pci.c.ctm Wed Aug 2 16:24:19 2006 >> +++ sys/dev/uart/uart_bus_pci.c Wed Nov 15 10:18:56 2006 >> @@ -101,6 +101,8 @@ >> 8 * DEFAULT_RCLK }, >> { 0x1409, 0x7168, 0x1409, 0x4028, "Timedia Technology Serial >> Port", 0x10, >> 8 * DEFAULT_RCLK }, >> +{ 0x1409, 0x7168, 0x1409, 0x4037, "Timedia Technology Serial >> Port", 0x10, >> + 8 * DEFAULT_RCLK }, >> { 0x1409, 0x7168, 0x1409, 0x5025, "Timedia Technology Serial >> Port", 0x10, >> 8 * DEFAULT_RCLK }, >> { 0x1409, 0x7168, 0x1409, 0x5027, "Timedia Technology Serial >> Port", 0x10, >> > >The patch is not right. The PCI device you talk about is a *dual* serial >I/O card. As such, puc(4) needs to attach to it, not uart(4). Adding the >PCI ids to uart(4) will only cause a conflict, not to mention that if >uart(4) attaches, it only attaches to the first. Am I mistaken or, is it actually the case that puc(4) attaches to the board and not uart(4)? puc0: port 0x2000-0x201f irq 10 at device 14.0 on pci0 uart2: <16550 or compatible> on puc0 uart2: fast interrupt uart3: <16550 or compatible> on puc0 uart3: fast interrupt >However, the patch shows that the clock on these cards is 8 times the >default clock. That was just a rough guess, copied from seemingly similar cards. So I understand no specific puc(4) attribution needs to be made for this card. It is already properly recognized, albeit with misleading text in pucdata.c: { "Dolphin Peripherals 4036", { 0x1409, 0x7168, 0, 0 }, { 0xffff, 0xffff, 0, 0 }, { { PUC_PORT_TYPE_COM, 0x10, 0x00, COM_FREQ * 8 }, { PUC_PORT_TYPE_COM, 0x10, 0x08, COM_FREQ * 8 }, }, }, >I think that is why puc(4)+uart(4) doesn't work. If >you select a baudrate that 8 times lower than what you know the baudrate >should be, then you should be able to transmit and receive data. If >that's the case, then puc(4) needs to be fixed to have the correct >clock value for these boards. I will give this a try to see if it helps. Note that also pucdata.c assumes 8 times baudrate. >Note also that I have not heard of uart(4) being wrong in classifying >the type as 16550, 1660 or otherwise. Fine with me. I am not claiming the source mentioned is correct. I just say there appears to be some disagreement. Thanks for your response anyway. Regards, Helge