Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 16:22:47 -0800 (PST) From: Howard Lew <digital@www2.shoppersnet.com> To: "Donald J. Maddox" <dmaddox@scsn.net> Cc: John Kelly <jak@cetlink.net>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 16650 Support(?) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980111161526.2731A-100000@www2.shoppersnet.com> In-Reply-To: <34B957B6.AEC4CDAF@scsn.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 11 Jan 1998, Donald J. Maddox wrote:
> John Kelly wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 11 Jan 1998 15:06:19 -0500, dmaddox@scsn.net (Donald J.
> > Maddox) wrote:
> >
> > > I recently bought a 16C650-based LavaPort ISA card to support the
> > >230,400 bps capability of my ISDN modem. It works fine under W95, but
> > >does _not_ work fine under FBSD-current.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > John
>
> Hmmm... I originally configured it as a basic 16550, since
> sio apparently doesn't have any support for >115.2Kbps anyway, but
> even then it looked like the baud rate just couldn't be changed
> from 9600. I suppose it's possible that the LavaPort's interface
> is non-standard(?) Anybody have any experience with this card?
>
I am not sure about fbsd-current, but isn't 115200 the maximum serial port
speed supported by the sio driver (for example in 2.2-stable) ?
If so, is there a reason why it could not be set higher? (i.e. 230400)
in sioreg.h it has:
#define COMBRD(x) (1843200 / (16*(x)))
Can this be recalculated for:
#define COMBRD(x) (3686400 / (16*(x)))
and add a line to the comspeedtab in sio.c
{ 230400, COMBRD(230400) },
and perhaps any necessary changes in delay time...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980111161526.2731A-100000>