From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 4 19:42:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069F01065677; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:42:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from smtpoutm.mac.com (smtpoutm.mac.com [17.148.16.69]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2EC8FC12; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:42:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from asmtp016-bge351000.mac.com (asmtp016-bge351000 [10.150.69.79]) by smtpoutm.mac.com (Xserve/smtpout006/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id m64JgafL025753; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 12:42:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Received: from [192.168.1.102] (209-128-86-226.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.86.226]) by asmtp016.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-6.03 (built Mar 14 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0K3H00LASYQZWJ90@asmtp016.mac.com>; Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:42:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: From: Marcel Moolenaar To: "M. Warner Losh" In-reply-to: <20080704.063540.1210476607.imp@bsdimp.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:42:35 -0700 References: <20080703205220.GW14567@hoeg.nl> <486D4006.2050303@freebsd.org> <993E865A-A426-4036-9E09-A87D7474DE80@mac.com> <20080704.063540.1210476607.imp@bsdimp.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) Cc: arch@freebsd.org, sam@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, ed@80386.nl Subject: Re: MPSAFE TTY schedule [uart vs sio] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:42:37 -0000 On Jul 4, 2008, at 5:35 AM, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : I looked into it in 2003 but since I don't have any hardware, > : I wasn't the one able to do it. I think the fundamental problem > : is that the BRG is not part of the UART itself and needs a > : separate handle or even (tag, handle) pair to access. That's as > : far as I know the only big thing about the work. > : > : For me not having access to the hardware is a showstopper for > : looking into it myself. > > Do you need physical access? No, not at all. As long as the USART is connected to another UART that I can access and as long as I can load/unload the uart(4) module, I should be able to write the support for it. Even only restricted sudo(1) should be fine. > I have a pc98 machine I can put back on > the network. It has the 8251 chip in it. It also has a 16550 part as > well since it is a later model which had both... Perfect. A null-modem cable between the two of them and I should be all set. -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com