Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 03:24:29 +0300 From: Maxim Mazurok <maxim@km.ua> To: ticso@cicely.de Cc: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Subject: Re: additional com-port Message-ID: <20030614002429.GN338@km.ua> In-Reply-To: <20030613235336.GF7279@cicely8.cicely.de> References: <20030613210519.GH338@km.ua> <20030613224912.GB7279@cicely8.cicely.de> <20030613225959.GI338@km.ua> <20030613230232.GJ338@km.ua> <20030613232116.GC7279@cicely8.cicely.de> <20030613233057.GM338@km.ua> <20030613235336.GF7279@cicely8.cicely.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:53:37AM +0200, Bernd Walter wrote: >> >What is wrong with the second onboard serial? >> >You just have to remove the flags which declare it to be a special >> >debug interface for to kernel. >> >See sio(4) manpage for details on flags. >> >> hmmm >> sio2 - it's no traditional com-port >> it's ISA Cisco router console (cisco AP-EC) >> i no need second onboard com-port, but i need access to cisco console > >And you can't just give it another IRQ? in SRM for onboard ports? >Cisco should know that IRQ 3 and 4 are typically in use. only 3 and 4. no else. >> if i deactivated sio1 in SRM, change settings of cisco console to IO_COM2 >> and irq 3, can i use next kernel config for worked serial console to freebsd >> and worked console to cisco: >> >> device sio0 at isa? port IO_COM1 irq 4 >> device sio1 at isa? port IO_COM2 irq 3 >> ? > >Yes - that should work. > >> and one more: now console to server connected to second com-port on >> board(upper). it's right? > >Sorry - I can't follow you here. >The console is always on sio0, which is the upper one on PC164, so >I asume it's also upper on PC164SX. >The lower port needs to be disabled so you can reuse it's IRQ. tnx! -- Maxim Mazurok (MMP2-RIPE)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030614002429.GN338>