Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:28:11 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Alexey Lukin <al@cn.ua>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Missing sio0 and sio1 (was: HELP! Please, HELP!) Message-ID: <19980518102811.J427@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <355EC236.4626669B@cn.ua>; from Alexey Lukin on Sun, May 17, 1998 at 01:55:50PM %2B0300 References: <6jleo9$ee0@elit.elit.chernigov.ua> <355EA834.A657FA38@cn.ua> <19980517195812.B427@freebie.lemis.com> <355EC236.4626669B@cn.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 17 May 1998 at 13:55:50 +0300, Alexey Lukin wrote: > Hi, Greg! > > Greg Lehey wrote: > [...] >> ? >> ? I giot the same sort of problems with different new motherboards. >> ? Well, the SIO detection code is TOO sophisticated and does not recognise >> ? MOST of on-board 16550 sios. >> >> I haven't heard anybody claim that before. Can you substantiate this >> claim? Which motherboards have you used? What UARTs do they use? >> Did the patch work with all of them? > > I tried motherboards of 2 wendors: "Micro Star" (MS-5156) > and few lastI "Iwill" boards. OK, we know about the IWill boards. That's what the patch is for. Have you tried it? > All boards have 16550A chips. Linux 2.0.32,33 recognized sio ports and > worked well, > but 2.2.5-R, 2.2.6-R refused to DETECT sio ports. (minor nit) could you please try to write approximately even-length lines? Something like this: > All boards have 16550A chips. Linux 2.0.32,33 recognized sio ports > and worked well, but 2.2.5-R, 2.2.6-R refused to DETECT sio ports. It makes things a lot easier to read. (end nit) No, modern boards use integrated multi-I/O chips. The IWill boards use an ALi chip which includes a UART which looks like a 16550, but it's not a 16550. In particular, it has additional register which need to be initialized. >> In any case, code which doesn't recognize all UARTS is not *too* >> sophisticated. > > I mean only style of /sys/i386/isa/sio.c. Sorry, I don't understand. >> At the moment, we don't know that this affects more than a fraction of >> all motherboards. Yuri wasn't confident enough to commit this patch >> (which, so far, has always worked), because he was afraid it might >> break the majority for whom the current code works. > > Ok, Ok. But I spent a week changing motherboards for simplest worksation > :-) If it makes you any happier, it took me about that long, too. > IMHO, sio detection procedure may have options "STRICT" to do what > it tries to do. If I just want to have 9600 console or mouse on sio > device, I do not need all the troubles with detection. BTHW, SIO > code itself works just fine on 115200. > > And please, exuse me if I said something in offesive manner. It's my > pure English, not the intention. Yes, we're thinking about it. The problem is that so far very few people have been affected, and until a number of people are prepared to try this out with their hardware, we're concerned that the fix may break a significant number of other hardware. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980518102811.J427>