Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 17:51:32 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Cc: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Subject: Re: i386 cpu_reset_real: code/comment mismatch Message-ID: <200805191751.32336.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200805191032.03134.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <4828557B.9000506@icyb.net.ua> <20080512182328.09a8a173@gumby.homeunix.com.> <200805191032.03134.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 19 May 2008 10:32:02 am John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday 12 May 2008 01:23:28 pm RW wrote: > > On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:34:35 +0300 > > > > Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> wrote: > > > This is not a real issue, just a code clarification. > > > > > > First a snippet from sys/i386/i386/vm_machdep.c, cpu_reset_real() > > > /* > > > * Attempt to force a reset via the Reset Control register at > > > * I/O port 0xcf9. Bit 2 forces a system reset when it is > > > * written as 1. Bit 1 selects the type of reset to attempt: > > > * 0 selects a "soft" reset, and 1 selects a "hard" reset. We > > > * try to do a "soft" reset first, and then a "hard" reset. > > > */ > > > outb(0xcf9, 0x2); > > > outb(0xcf9, 0x6); > > > > > > I think that the comment is correct up to but not including the last > > > sentence. Writing 0x2 sets bit 1 to 1 (thus selecting hard reset), and > > > writing 0x6 sets both bits 2 and 1 to 1 (thus performing hard reset). > > > So we always just do a hard reset, no trying of soft reset (would it > > > even make sense to do the last line of the comment says). > > > > It looks to me as if the comment was added retrospectively by someone > > who got the two bits mixed-up when reading the source. If bits 1 and 2 > > were the other way around, it would be code for a soft-reset followed > > by a hard-reset. > > Or I just fubar'd the code. The comment and code were added at the same time > and it should do a soft reset first. I'll have to go check the docs again to > see which is wrong (comment or code). So, the comment is correct and not the code. Curiously enough, OpenSolaris does the same thing (it writes 0x2 followed by 0x6), but it has some sort of comment which implies that you have to do a write to set or clear bit 1 before setting bit 2. Linux only uses 0xcf9 on a specific x86 machine (View workstation or some such) in which case it just does a single write of 0x6. I'll test locally to make sure 0x4 and 0x6 both work and if so I will commit the fix. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200805191751.32336.jhb>