Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 18 Apr 2014 09:20:01 GMT
From:      Milan Obuch <bsd@dino.sk>
To:        freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: kern/186891: [puc] [patch] MCS9922 based card not known
Message-ID:  <201404180920.s3I9K1hZ072182@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/186891; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Milan Obuch <bsd@dino.sk>
To: Marius Strobl <marius@freebsd.org>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/186891: [puc] [patch] MCS9922 based card not known
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 11:05:25 +0200

 On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 23:26:56 +0200
 Marius Strobl <marius@freebsd.org> wrote:
 
 > The submitted patch seems inherently bogus; the referenced function
 > puc_config_saturn() doesn't exist/isn't provided and it's always a bad
 > idea to add an entry for a device that potentially is part of a line
 > of controllers with different port configurations and all having the
 > same vendor and device ID combination as a wildcard match to puc(4).
 > However, most importantly, MCS9922 apparently are multi-function
 > devices providing one UART per function so puc(4) shouldn't be used
 > in the first place but uart(4) should be tought to probe and attach
 > these controllers directly instead. Could you please revert your
 > patch for puc(4) and test whether the attached one provies you with
 > two instances of uart(4) for that card?
 > 
 > Marius
 > 
 
 I will test your patch, allow some time to do so, but you are only
 partially right - MCS9922 provides not only one UART per function,
 there is also GPIO (and possibly I2C) available to. On my board only
 UARTs are used, but some time later I am considering some hardware
 modification to access GPIO too. Not known yet is how to use that on
 software side...
 
 Milan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201404180920.s3I9K1hZ072182>