Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:50:25 GMT From: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/103841: [fdc] fdc(4) does not work (regression) Message-ID: <200610051650.k95GoPiT078457@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/103841; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Eugene Grosbein <eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/103841: [fdc] fdc(4) does not work (regression) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 00:48:21 +0800 On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:48:52PM +0800, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > > >It's definetely a regression from 4.11-STABLE that runs fine on this > > >system with ACPI fully enabled > > Hmm, I was wrong about 4.11 using ACPI - it does not use it here really, > it uses "good old" APM. > > > It would be interesting to know how 4.x probes the hardware vs. how it > > apperas in the 6.x dmesg. > > 4.11-STABLE: > > fdc0: <NEC 72065B or clone> at port 0x3f0-0x3f5,0x3f7 irq 6 drq 2 on isa0 > fdc0: FIFO enabled, 8 bytes threshold > fd0: <1440-KB 3.5" drive> on fdc0 drive 0 > > 6.2-PRERELEASE: > > fdc0: <floppy drive controller> port 0x3f0-0x3f5,0x3f0 irq 6 drq 2 on acpi0 > fdc0: [FAST] > fd0: <1440-KB 3.5" drive> on fdc0 drive 0 I managed to know that fdc_initial_reset() in sys/dev/fdc/fdc.c probes my fdc controller as "Enhanced floppy controller" (ic_type==0x90) vs. 4.x's "NEC close". BTW, does in possible to obtain fdc's probe result vs. fdc_acpi's result without addition of call to "fdc_print_child(device_get_parent(dev), dev);" to fdc_initial_reset()? I've forced sys/dev/fdc/fdc.c to probe my controller as "NEC clone" by moving "case 0x90:" upwards to "case 0x80" in this function but that does not help, no change in behavour was observed. Eugene Grosbein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200610051650.k95GoPiT078457>