From owner-freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 27 07:30:14 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFFA16A403 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:30:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [69.147.83.40]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8465A43D5F for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:29:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kAR7UEMa068688 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:30:14 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id kAR7UE5I068687; Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:30:14 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:30:14 GMT Message-Id: <200611270730.kAR7UE5I068687@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.org From: Marcel Moolenaar Cc: Subject: Re: i386/105616: UART PCI device just silent... X-BeenThere: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Marcel Moolenaar List-Id: I386-specific issues for FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 07:30:14 -0000 The following reply was made to PR i386/105616; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Helge Oldach Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: i386/105616: UART PCI device just silent... Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 23:21:50 -0800 On Nov 26, 2006, at 11:11 PM, Helge Oldach wrote: > There are no specific hints for the puc-based UARTs. I understand that > PCI devices don't need such hints. Actually, both the "sio kernel" and > the "uart kernel" locate the device identically on the same IRQ and IO > ports. > > Am I mistaken here? No, not at all. You got it right. >> Why do you have PUC_FASTINTR for sio, but not for uart? > > I had just been trying to play with the knobs that I have in the > config > file. PUC_FASTINTR reduces overruns somewhat for the "sio kernel" > but it > doesn't change behaviour at all. Specifically, no impact on this > issue. I think it's time to go back to the question why uart(4) detects the SUN 1889 chipset as 166550 compatible and not as 16650 compatible. I think there may be a chipset-specific issue here that uart(4) seems to trigger. I need to get one of those cards and analyze the problem in more detail. In other words, I think we have gone over the differences and the only difference that remains is that sio(4) and uart(4) interact differently with the hardware. -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com