Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:12:06 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest -CURRENT/i386 could not start under VirutalBox 4.1.18 and 4.2 (Windows host): hangs up after atrtc0 detection Message-ID: <1348089126.95562.62.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmon-Mv21PB06ZdC2N1FguD4kHnsNt1kny9T=eHQXRygojA@mail.gmail.com> References: <80840563.20120920002200@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1252171344.20120920003724@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1348087584.95562.55.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <1859311530.20120920005449@serebryakov.spb.ru> <CAJ-VmokF=JK=TS34CdHqO5BTh6WN950tdK0C%2BUOWpFoQhTHhYA@mail.gmail.com> <1348088706.95562.61.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <CAJ-Vmon-Mv21PB06ZdC2N1FguD4kHnsNt1kny9T=eHQXRygojA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 14:08 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 19 September 2012 14:05, Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org> wrote: > > >> Add something to atrtc_start() to only loop over that loop say, 64k > >> times before dropping out; and print an error if it hits that > >> condition. > >> > >> Also, what's that RTCSA_8192 bit do? > > > > That should set the interrupt rate really high, to minimize the time > > wasted waiting for the status bit to change in the register. Maybe > > that's the part that vbox isn't emulating well and so it never simulates > > an interrupt and leaves that loop. Or maybe because the loop is a tight > > busy-wait the emulator never gets control to simulate the occurance of > > the interrupt. > > Right. Being totally clueless, is atrc_start() called just at > probe/attach, or during normal operation? > It's called just once, from the attach() routine for the rtc device. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1348089126.95562.62.camel>