From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Apr 10 06:28:44 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0D8BDE;
 Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:28:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru
 [46.4.40.135]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513556EC;
 Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:28:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lion.home.serebryakov.spb.ru (unknown
 [IPv6:2001:470:923f:1:900d:c887:884e:713b])
 (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru)
 by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 21B454AC57;
 Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:28:42 +0400 (MSK)
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:28:38 +0400
From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Organization: FreeBSD Project
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <1659145198.20130410102838@serebryakov.spb.ru>
To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Intel D2500CC motherboard and strange RS232/UART behavior
In-Reply-To: <201304091658.22810.jhb@freebsd.org>
References: <229402991.20130407172016@serebryakov.spb.ru>
 <201304091608.09257.jhb@freebsd.org>
 <105818341.20130410004451@serebryakov.spb.ru>
 <201304091658.22810.jhb@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org,
 Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:28:44 -0000

Hello, John.
You wrote 10 =E0=EF=F0=E5=EB=FF 2013 =E3., 0:58:22:

>>   Problem is, that every uart device now is independent from each
>>   other in good "OOP" style, and it looks like interrupt sharing we
>>   need one interrupt handler per irq (not per device), which will now
>>   about several UARTs. Something like "multiport" device, bot not
>>   exactly.
JB> No, the interrupt code itself will handle shared interrupts (it will
JB> call all handlers).  I think in practice that uart is setting
  And what will happen, if there is two UARTs asserting interrupt in
same time? First one returns "FILTER_HANDLED", will second handler be
called?

  ISA interrupt sharing IS NOT so simple. sio contains a lot of
 obscure code to work.

JB> INTR_EXCL or some such and/or uart doesn't set RF_SHAREABLE when
JB> allocating the IRQ.  It is probably the latter.  You could try just
JB> adding RF_SHAREABLE to the bus_alloc_resource_any() for the IRQ to
JB> uart and see if that fixes it.
        sc->sc_ires =3D bus_alloc_resource_any(dev, SYS_RES_IRQ, &sc->sc_ir=
id,
            RF_ACTIVE | RF_SHAREABLE);

It is here.

--=20
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>