Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:04:47 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: 10.0-release proposed patch for Atmel Message-ID: <EA0B9946-6033-449B-BDBD-65A910CC8C09@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmok%2Bg7ezxht1s0ELm5z4i-9GB%2Bzoxh29m-mOSRXuuGedYQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <B5B10EE3-955D-4A8C-A233-9DADF6898A54@bsdimp.com> <CAJ-Vmok%2Bg7ezxht1s0ELm5z4i-9GB%2Bzoxh29m-mOSRXuuGedYQ@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Dec 22, 2013, at 9:39 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Where's the original UART diff? http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=259685 Warner > > Adrian > > On Dec 22, 2013 1:45 AM, "Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > Gentlemen, > > Right now, the mountroot prompt doesn't work on Atmel CPUs. Almost all the characters are eaten. I recently committed an elegant fix for this into head to mask the interrupt for new characters and only do polling. > > However, it touched the base uart. In an abundance of caution, the re@ has asked me to see if I can come up with a fix w/o that. > > A less elegant, less functional fix can be found at http://people.freebsd.org/~imp/at91-mountroot-10.diff > > This fix defers turning on the RXRDY bit in the interrupt mask until we get the first interrupt after the first opening of the device. This is sufficient for mountroot> to work, but wouldn't fix things like GELI that prompt the user from the kernel. I think that's acceptable for 10.0 given the typical use case for atmel. > > Can the folks here that know Atmel take a look at the patch and let me know what you think? > > Warner > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EA0B9946-6033-449B-BDBD-65A910CC8C09>