Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH 11/18] pcmcia: do not use io_req_t when calling pcmcia_request_io()
Hi, http://userweb.kernel.org/~brodo/pcmcia-2.6.35.diff Serial part of Xircom card works with pcmcia-2.6.35.diff. - Original Message - Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 15:32:12 +0200 From: Dominik Brodowski li...@dominikbrodowski.net To: Komuro komurojun-...@nifty.com, pa...@ucw.cz Cc: linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH 11/18] pcmcia: do not use io_req_t when calling pcmcia_request_io() Hey, On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 09:50:31PM +0900, Komuro wrote: Also on re-inserting the card (with 2.6.36-rc4+ as of today)? I tried the 2.6.36-rc4-git4. Thanks for testing! elese we wouldn't see the is a 16550A message, right? Even if the COR(Configuration Option Register) of irq is not properly setup , we can see the above message... Nothing relating to setting CISREG_COR (at least on pcnet_cs) changed, and serial_cs does not modify CISREG_COR on such pseudo-multifunction devices. Would it be possible for you to re-check plain 2.6.35 and 2.6.35 with the pcmcia patchset availble at http://userweb.kernel.org/~brodo/pcmcia-2.6.35.diff ? If this works, we know that it's a serial/tty core issue, else it's indeed a PCMCIA issue. Pavel: has the bt / pcmcia issue you were seeing with -rc1 been solved? If not, could you try out 2.6.35 with this bigdiff as well, please? Thanks best, Dominik ___ Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pcmcia
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH 11/18] pcmcia: do not use io_req_t when calling pcmcia_request_io()
Hi! Nothing relating to setting CISREG_COR (at least on pcnet_cs) changed, and serial_cs does not modify CISREG_COR on such pseudo-multifunction devices. Would it be possible for you to re-check plain 2.6.35 and 2.6.35 with the pcmcia patchset availble at http://userweb.kernel.org/~brodo/pcmcia-2.6.35.diff ? If this works, we know that it's a serial/tty core issue, else it's indeed a PCMCIA issue. Pavel: has the bt / pcmcia issue you were seeing with -rc1 been solved? If not, could you try out 2.6.35 with this bigdiff as well, please? No, I still have the problem in -rc4. I did a quick test, and 2.6.35+your bigdiff works ok. (did not run make clean, that would be slow) Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ___ Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pcmcia
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH 11/18] pcmcia: do not use io_req_t when calling pcmcia_request_io()
Hi, Also on re-inserting the card (with 2.6.36-rc4+ as of today)? I tried the 2.6.36-rc4-git4. The serial part still does not work, before and after re-inserting the card. elese we wouldn't see the is a 16550A message, right? Even if the COR(Configuration Option Register) of irq is not properly setup, we can see the above message... Hey, On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 07:20:31PM +0900, Komuro wrote: With this patch, fmvj18x_cs based card works (both network and serial). good. Will push the patch upstream, then. but Serial part of Xircom card still does not work. Also on re-inserting the card (with 2.6.36-rc4+ as of today)? I think the reason is irq or io_width or io_lines is not setuped properly for Xircom-card by pcmcia_core. But those values are the same for 2.6.35 and 2.6.36-rc4+, else we wouldn't see the same eth0: Xircom: port 0x300, irq 18, hwaddr 00:10:a4:f3:db:02 0.1: ttyS3 at I/O 0x2e8 (irq = 18) is a 16550A messages. Furthermore, at least some access to the serial part does work, elese we wouldn't see the is a 16550A message, right? Best, Dominik ___ Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pcmcia
