Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 18:00:53 +0000 From: Gavin Atkinson <gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, imp@freebsd.org, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: puc fails to attach serial ports Message-ID: <1134496853.15730.118.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <200512131101.44375.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20051211181324.G71610@ury.york.ac.uk> <1134481135.15730.76.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> <1134485368.15730.95.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> <200512131101.44375.jhb@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 11:01 -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > OK, I've cracked what's happening. Indeed we are somehow missing a call > > to devclass_add_driver(9). I was loading puc as a module, and in that > > case the following relevant calls to devclass_add_driver are made: > > > Because sio(4) only includes sio_puc.c in the kernel if you have 'puc' in your > kernel config, and the puc kernel module only includes the puc files, it > doesn't include sio_puc.c and ppc_puc.c. uart has the same issue as well. > Looking at the three attachments, there's no reason for them to be dependent > on puc, they don't actually call any symbols in the puc(4) kernel module > itself, so they can be compiled into kernels w/o puc without causing any > harm. Then loading puc as a module would work. Here's a patch: Thanks! I can confirm that this patch fixes the problem I was seeing. I understand David O'Brien's concerns about the patch and associated increase in kernel size, but as it stands, there seems to be little point in creating a puc module as it cannot work with the GENERIC kernel (other than for devices using uart, as that isn't in GENERIC). Gavinhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1134496853.15730.118.camel>