From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 25 19:43:42 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: 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 0F40016A420; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:43:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45BEE43D67; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:43:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1494E1A3C28; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 83D655121A; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:43:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:43:38 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Gleb Smirnoff Message-ID: <20051025194338.GA81317@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <025401c5d953$47004480$821cfa9e@mics.msu.su> <20051025174337.GA45694@xor.obsecurity.org> <20051025193144.GU41520@cell.sick.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UugvWAfsgieZRqgk" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051025193144.GU41520@cell.sick.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: Mike G , current@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: uart and puc attach conflict X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:43:42 -0000 --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:31:44PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 01:43:37PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > K> > I have a problem with multi-port card based on Nm9845 chip. > K> > It's a card with 4 com-ports. > K> > It perfectly works with puc(4) and sio(4) drivers if they compiled i= nto=20 > K> > kernel. > K> > or with puc(4) and uart(4) drivers if they loaded manualy. > K> > But if puc(4) and uart(4) are compiled into kernel or loaded from > K> > loader.conf - problem appears. > K>=20 > K> Isn't puc superceded by uart? Why do you need both? >=20 > Shouldn't uarts attach on puc? This is what I have in 5.4-STABLE > system: >=20 > puc0: mem 0xea202000-0xea202fff irq 5 at device 11.0 = on pci0 > uart0: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart1: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart2: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart3: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart4: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart5: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart6: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 > uart7: <16750 or compatible> on puc0 >=20 > Should it be other way in 6.0 and HEAD? Sorry, I was confused..you do need both. I was thinking about uart superceding other sparc tty drivers. Kris --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDXorqWry0BWjoQKURAgKJAJ9ZMRG6m6vZUuSfgm+aXab4nd5DTACg81hq jqUlNvUATO8FrZRizQrmkwg= =PFGz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--