Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 16:37:54 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Subject: Re: i386 cpu_reset_real: code/comment mismatch Message-ID: <4832D432.2050907@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <1211246591.00072455.1211234402@10.7.7.3> References: <1210616585.00069210.1210605002@10.7.7.3> <1210627393.00069294.1210614002@10.7.7.3> <1211221409.00072277.1211209802@10.7.7.3> <1211246591.00072455.1211234402@10.7.7.3>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 20/05/2008 00:51 John Baldwin said the following: > 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. And this code is most likely never reached in majority of the cases, reset via keyboard controller should just work. BTW, I understand that there is a difference between hard and soft reset in terms of hardware signals being asserted, but I don't quite understand general consequences. I.e. what is a practical difference between hard and soft reset? -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4832D432.2050907>