Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:25:18 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> To: Jonathan Chen <jonc@chen.org.nz> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: puc(4) and single I/O port cards. Message-ID: <42F621F4-8083-42BE-ADA9-243DD661EB73@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinrMaqB9Bev41NwgQSSvcF19TyOQ4T4PW-S_2vd@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTikz0KLu4v9J2kJmmQ=rZe54CSjvZ%2BG0pu0SC4Nw@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinrMaqB9Bev41NwgQSSvcF19TyOQ4T4PW-S_2vd@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 28, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Jonathan Chen wrote: > I've taken a look at the puc(4) code, and from my limited > understanding, it appears that the section that's preventing it from > being recognised is in puc.c:puc_bfe_probe(). In particular: > > /* We don't attach to single-port serial cards. */ > if (cfg->ports == PUC_PORT_1S || cfg->ports == PUC_PORT_1P) > return (EDOOFUS); > > Why is the check there? Is there something about single I/O port cards > that interacts badly with the rest of the system? Single-port devices are handled by ppc(4) for parallel ports and uart(4) for serial ports. There's no need to have puc(4) in between. -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42F621F4-8083-42BE-ADA9-243DD661EB73>