Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:48:38 +1000 (EST) From: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sio => uart: one port is gone Message-ID: <20080916021035.N439@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <48CE815A.9040907@icyb.net.ua> References: <48CE5E9B.9000304@icyb.net.ua> <20080916002823.E439@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <48CE815A.9040907@icyb.net.ua>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 15/09/2008 17:36 Ian Smith said the following: > > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > > This is a fairly standard and old machine with 2 COM ports. > > > Recently (last Friday) I decided to update my RELENG_7 system and also > > > to transition from sio to uart. > > > > This what I had before the upgrade: > > > kernel: sio0: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags > > > 0x10 on acpi0 > > > kernel: sio0: type 16550A > > > kernel: sio0: [FILTER] > > > kernel: sio1: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x2e8-0x2ef irq 3 on acpi0 > > > kernel: sio1: type 16550A > > > kernel: sio1: [FILTER] > > > > This is what I have now: > > > uart0: <16550 or compatible> at port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on isa0 > > > uart0: [FILTER] > > > > This is what I have in device.hints for uart: > > > hint.uart.0.at="isa" > > > hint.uart.0.port="0x3F8" > > > hint.uart.0.flags="0x10" > > > hint.uart.0.irq="4" > > > hint.uart.1.at="isa" > > > hint.uart.1.port="0x2F8" > > > > but it's shown as 0x2e8 above .. > > > > > hint.uart.1.irq="3" > > > hint.uart.2.at="isa" > > > > Precisely the same hints (s/uart/sio/) I had for sio. > > > > 0x2f8 is 'standard COM2' address .. did sio1 work ok at 0x2e8 before? > thank you, I guess I had a typo in my hints, but the port did work. > Looking at the old dmesg I see that sio devices are found 'on acpi0' as > opposed to uart now being found on 'isa0'. > Maybe this is another difference. Does sound a bit odd; looks like the ACPI info trumped hints for sio. > Maybe sio was attached using some information from acpi, so hints were not > that important. But maybe the same acpi information is not applied to uart, > so it does depend on the hints. Sounds a reasonable theory .. so does fixing that hint find the UART? Maybe a verbose dmesg would provide more clues re uart's attachment? > If this guess is correct then this is a regression in sio=>uart transition, > if not, then I'll just correct my device.hints and shut up :-) Or both :) You'd think if ACPI info is available uart should use it, but then if it's attaching to the isa bus instead, maybe not .. hmm. cheers, Ianhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080916021035.N439>