On Monday 04 June 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 12:16:05PM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote: > > Adding "nopnp" parameters finds device just fine so it is apparently > > result of this commit: > > > > commit d0d4f69bb65a8c1c1430c577a583632709b874c6 > > Author: Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> > > Date: Tue May 8 00:36:05 2007 -0700 > > > > smsc-ircc2: add PNP support > > > > What information is needed to debug it further? > > It seems that PnP tells us that the FIR port is at 0x2e8 while we're > expecting it at 0x2f8. > Could you apply this patch and then send me a dmesg dump of the > smsc-ircc initialisation ? > here is dmesg: Detected unconfigured Toshiba laptop with ALi ISA bridge SMSC IrDA chip, pre-configuring device. Activated ALi 1533 ISA bridge port 0x02e8. Activated ALi 1533 ISA bridge port 0x02f8. pnp: Device 00:0a activated. smsc_ircc_pnp_probe(): fir 0x2e8 sir 0x100 dma 1 irq 5 High: 0xef, Chip 0x1 smsc_ircc_present(), addr 0x02e8 - no device found! pnp: Device 00:0a disabled. And here is what PnP tells us: {pts/1}% cat /sys/bus/pnp/devices/00:0a/options port 0x100-0x130, align 0xf, size 0x8, 16-bit address decoding irq 3,4,5,6,7,10,11 High-Edge dma 1,2,3 16-bit compatible Dependent: 01 - Priority acceptable port 0x3f8-0x3f8, align 0x0, size 0x8, 16-bit address decoding Dependent: 02 - Priority acceptable port 0x2e8-0x2e8, align 0x0, size 0x8, 16-bit address decoding Dependent: 03 - Priority acceptable port 0x2f8-0x2f8, align 0x0, size 0x8, 16-bit address decoding Dependent: 04 - Priority acceptable port 0x3e8-0x3e8, align 0x0, size 0x8, 16-bit address decoding {pts/1}% cat /sys/bus/pnp/devices/00:0a/resources state = disabled {pts/1}% sudo sh -c 'echo activate > /sys/bus/pnp/devices/00:0a/resources' {pts/1}% cat /sys/bus/pnp/devices/00:0a/resources state = active io 0x100-0x107 io 0x2e8-0x2ef irq 5 dma 1 -andrey > Cheers, > Samuel. > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/irda/smsc-ircc2.c b/drivers/net/irda/smsc-ircc2.c > index 9043bf4..d1d46a6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/irda/smsc-ircc2.c > +++ b/drivers/net/irda/smsc-ircc2.c > @@ -391,6 +391,9 @@ static int __init smsc_ircc_pnp_probe(struct pnp_dev > *dev, dma = pnp_dma(dev, 0); > irq = pnp_irq(dev, 0); > > + printk("%s(): fir 0x%x sir 0x%x dma %d irq %d\n", > + __FUNCTION__, firbase, sirbase, dma, irq); > + > if (smsc_ircc_open(firbase, sirbase, dma, irq)) > return -ENODEV; > > @@ -655,6 +658,7 @@ static int smsc_ircc_present(unsigned int fir_base, > unsigned int sir_base) irq = (config & IRCC_INTERFACE_IRQ_MASK) >> 4; > > if (high != 0x10 || low != 0xb8 || (chip != 0xf1 && chip != 0xf2)) { > + printk("High: 0x%x, Chip 0x%x\n", high, chip); > IRDA_WARNING("%s(), addr 0x%04x - no device found!\n", > __FUNCTION__, fir_base); > goto out3;
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- From: Andrey Borzenkov <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- From: Andrey Borzenkov <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- From: Samuel Ortiz <[email protected]>
- 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- Prev by Date: [PATCH -mm] Unionfs: Fix lock leak in unionfs_ioctl
- Next by Date: Re: Kconfig variable "COBALT" is not defined anywhere
- Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- Next by thread: Re: 2.6.22-rc: regression: no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
- Index(es):