Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:23:54 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why doesn't ppc(4) check non-ENXIO failures during probe? Message-ID: <AANLkTinpbFFqtSSuqq7p-v82H7riUkWyc8LJbzGi1ojs@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201008161619.35740.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <AANLkTinMSdRh0T4aWpZ4gR%2BRogzHQS5Vz7f6O1_vozvo@mail.gmail.com> <201008161619.35740.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:19 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sunday, August 15, 2010 1:33:38 am Garrett Cooper wrote: >> =A0 =A0 One thing that's puzzling me about the ppc(4) driver's ISA >> routines is that it only checks to see whether or not the device has >> an IO error: > > Your patch would break hinted ppc devices. =A0ENXIO means that the device= _t > being probed has an ISA PNP ID, but it does not match any of the IDs in t= he > list. =A0ENONET means that the device_t does not have an ISA ID at all. = =A0For the > isa bus that means it was explicitly created via a set of ppc.X hints. Just clarifying some things because I don't know all of the details. If a ISA based parallel port fails to probe with ENOENT, then it's assumed that the configuration details are incorrect, and it should reprobe the device with different configuration settings (irq, isa port, etc) a max of BIOS_MAX_PPC times before it finally bails failing to configure a device (ppc_probe in ppc.c)? What if all of the ISA details in the device.hints file are bogus and the only detail that's correct is in the puc driver, etc? Would it fail to connect the card if it reached the BIOS_MAX_PPC ISA-related failure limit (see ppc_probe again)? Thanks, -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTinpbFFqtSSuqq7p-v82H7riUkWyc8LJbzGi1ojs>