Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 20:12:12 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: jak@cetlink.net (John Kelly) Cc: toor@dyson.iquest.net, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 16650 Support(?) Message-ID: <199801120112.UAA00657@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <34c0795e.7050337@mail.cetlink.net> from John Kelly at "Jan 12, 98 02:07:04 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Kelly said: > On Sun, 11 Jan 1998 19:07:35 -0500 (EST), "John S. Dyson" > <toor@dyson.iquest.net> wrote: > > >> The 650 support seems to be broken, so don't flag it as a 650. Run it > >> as a 550 and it should work fine. You still get the benefit of the > >> deeper FIFO, even when it's defined as a 550. You don't get the auto > >> CTS/RTS flow control, but that has questionable value anyway. > >> > >I have a 16650 based card, and it appears to work well. It would be interesting > >to figure out why mine works, and others don't. > > > > Do you have it flagged as a 650 in your kernel, or as a 550? > As a 650. > > I emailed you about the SIO 650 support a couple of months ago but I > guess you were busy with other stuff. There seem to be some changes > in SIO for 650 support, attributed to you. If that is true, can you > describe the changes? > The 650 enabled code uses the entire 32 byte buffer, and enables HW flow control when it is enabled by the driver. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@freebsd.org | it just makes you look stupid, jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801120112.UAA00657>