From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 26 14:32:09 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD90A16A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 26 Sep 2004 14:32:09 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from web14828.mail.yahoo.com (web14828.mail.yahoo.com
	[216.136.225.230])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 865CD43D48
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 26 Sep 2004 14:32:09 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from rosti_bsd@yahoo.com)
Message-ID: <20040926143209.44197.qmail@web14828.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [212.143.154.227] by web14828.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:32:09 PDT
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 07:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rostislav Krasny <rosti_bsd@yahoo.com>
To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040921.143546.63053469.imp@bsdimp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: new fdc(4) and new fdcontrol(8) behavior (5.3-BETA5)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 14:32:09 -0000

--- "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
> In message: <20040921122354.73480.qmail@web14827.mail.yahoo.com>
>             Rostislav Krasny <rosti_bsd@yahoo.com> writes:
> : Why the 3F7h port isn't used by new fdc(4) on my system? Is it a
> : hardware detection bug?
> 
> It is a minor, hardware detection bug.  Your bios doesn't list it as a
> resource, but should.  We do use it, but we don't allocate it with the
> bus system, which is why it doesn't appear in dmesg.  A
> mostly-harmless cosmetic issue.

How the 0x3f7 port could be used without allocation? My BIOS doesn't list
0x3f0-0x3f1 ports as resurces of the PNP0700 device too, but fdc(4) use them
anyhow:

PNP0700: adding dma mask 0x4
PNP0700: adding io range 0x3f2-0x3f5, size=0x4, align=0
PNP0700: adding irq mask 0x40
pnpbios: handle 12 device ID PNP0700 (0007d041)

# devinfo -uv | grep -e "0x37[0-5,7]" -e "0x3f[0-5,7]"
    0x300-0x375 (root0)
    0x377 (root0)
    0x3f0-0x3f5 (fdc0)
    0x3f7 (root0)



		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail