[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801250013410.3424@dbs1.uni-c.dtu.dk>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:34:36 +0100 (CET)
From: "Oyvind Aabling" <Oyvind.Aabling@...-c.dk>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/char/moxa.c, kernel 2.6.23.14
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 01/22/2008 11:23 AM, Oyvind Aabling wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>> Would you be willing to test such a patch for point no. 3?
>>
>> Yes, I could do that.
>>
>> I can see your point about the non-portability of it, but
>> how about this scenario, to provide backwards compatibility:
>>
>> * We keep the (ugly and non-compatible) MOXA_GET_CONF
>> ioctl, to avoid breaking the old moxaload.
>> Let's rename it to MOXA_GET_CONF_OLD or MOXA_GET_CONF_BAD in the driver.
>> * Create a new MOXA_GET_CONF ioctl (with a new
>> number, of course), that does it "the right way".
>> If you don't like renaming ioctl's, we need a new name for this one.
>> * Rewrite moxaload to either do a kernel version check
>> and use the new ioctl if available or the old if not.
>> Or skip that and let it call the new ioctl first.
>> If it succeeds (system running a newer kernel): fine, and
>> if not (system running an older kernel), use the old ioctl.
>>
>> The MOXA Intellio driver and moxaload have been "broken" ever since they
>> were written in 1999, and this way, we don't break anything - you can
>> use old or new kernel, and old or new moxaload in any combination.
>>
>> Whaddaya think ?
>
> We won't need anything from that. I'm almost done with firmware support. The
> only thing you'll need to do is to copy the .cod file(s) into /lib/firmware
> or wherever your firmware loader (probably udev nowadays) finds such files.
>
> Could you post me lspci -vvxxx output of your moxa card?
>
> thanks,
> --js
Ah, I see, you want to get rid of moxaload altogether ...
I'll test your patch series as soon as I get a chance - need to put a
MOXA card into a non-production machine first, so it'll be a few days.
We have a few MOXA Intellio C320 Turbo PCI
cards, here's lspci -vvxxx for one of them:
02:02.0 Serial controller: Moxa Technologies Co Ltd Intellio C320 Turbo PCI (rev 02) (prog-if 80)
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16
Region 1: I/O ports at 9400 [size=128]
Region 2: Memory at fb200000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
00: 93 13 00 32 03 00 80 02 02 80 00 07 08 00 00 00
10: 00 00 00 00 01 94 00 00 00 00 20 fb 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 01 00 00
40: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
50: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
60: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
70: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
80: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
90: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
a0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
b0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
c0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
d0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
e0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
f0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
The other cards looks identical, except for unimportant differences
in region mapping and IRQ allocation due to system differences.
Øyvind.
**************************************************************************
* Øyvind Aabling E-mail : Oyvind.Aabling@...-c.dk /~\ The ASCII *
* UNI-C Lyngby Phone : +45 35 87 88 89 \ / Ribbon *
* DTU Building 304 Phone : +45 35 87 89 51 (direct) X Campaign *
* DK-2800 LYNGBY Fax : +45 35 87 89 90 / \ Against *
* Denmark HTML Email! *
**************************************************************************
Powered by blists - more mailing lists