Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 05:04:36 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, Edwin Mons <e.mons@spcgroup.nl>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ep0 incorrectly probed Message-ID: <20000127210436.15CE61CD4@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Message from "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net> of "Thu, 27 Jan 2000 15:15:49 EST." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0001271514410.462-100000@sasami.jurai.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Matthew N. Dodd" wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2000, Peter Wemm wrote:
> > pnpinfo doesn't have anything to do with what the kernel thinks. It's a
> > userland program that manually resets and reconfigures the cards.. This is
> > an absolute disaster if you happened to be using the hardware, eg: the soun
d
> > driver. After running pnpinfo, the hardware essentially "disappears".
> >
> > pciconf(8) does it properly, it asks the kernel via /dev/pci. pnpinfo uses
> > /dev/io to bash on the ports directly.
>
> Thats kinda weird seeing as how pnpinfo correctly reports the settings as
> detected/assigned by the kernel for all other cards.
Hmm, I take some of that back. I'm still not 100% sure of the implications
of what I'm seeing in src/contrib/pnpinfo, but it still makes me nervous.
For example:
Logical device #0
IO: 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534 0x0534
IRQ 5 0
DMA 1 0
IO range check 0x00 activate 0x01
versus:
pcm0: <CS423x> at port 0x534-0x537,0x388-0x38b,0x220-0x22f irq 5 drq 1,0 on isa0
Which is right? Does the device really have all 8 IO ranges assigned to
the same address? (0x534) Or is pnpinfo wrong?
Cheers,
-Peter
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000127210436.15CE61CD4>