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>