On Thursday, April 11, 2013 3:01:40 am John-Mark Gurney wrote: > John Baldwin wrote this message on Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:16 -0400: > > On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 3:04:15 am Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > In message <1424327083.20130410103010_at_serebryakov.spb.ru>, Lev Serebryakov > > writ > > > es: > > > >Hello, Poul-Henning. > > > >You wrote 10 =E0=EF=F0=E5=EB=FF 2013 =E3., 0:52:04: > > > > > > > >>> Problem is, that every uart device now is independent from each > > > >>> other in good "OOP" style, and it looks like interrupt sharing we > > > >>> need one interrupt handler per irq (not per device), which will now > > > >>> about several UARTs. Something like "multiport" device, bot not > > > >>> exactly. > > > >PHK> That is what the puc(4) driver does... > > > > Yes, for PCI devices only :( > > > > > > Yes, it needs to learn to do it from hints for ISA. > > > > No, that is that not the right hammer for this. This isn't a single ISA > > device with two ports (which is what puc(4) is aimed at). > > Don't you remeber the old AST 4 port cards? Heck, even our handbook > talks about how to make those cards work: > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/faq/serial.html#enable-multiport-serial > > I have a couple of these cards around somewhere I think... Uses a DB-37 > connector for the ports.... > > Though if these ports don't have the logic that the AST cards did to > share the IRQ, that'd make it hard... > > The sio man page talks about this... These are multiport cards and something like puc or digi, etc. is fine for those. The OP's issue is that he has a board with 4 independent 16550 UARTs which are attempting to share IRQs. Those are not multiport cards and are thus a separate issue. -- John BaldwinReceived on Thu Apr 11 2013 - 12:55:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:36 UTC